From: tgpedersen
Message: 41966
Date: 2005-11-09
>This is your answer?
>
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > > > Let me try to be the Devil's advocate here:
> > > >
> > > > PIEers live in somewhere in India,
> > >
> > > GK: When?
> > As appropriate.
> >
> > >
> > > several groups
> > > > emigrate from
> > > > there to the northwest,
> > >
> > > GK: When? Where?
> > As appropriate.
> > >
> > > Asian groups arrive in the
> > > > PIEers land,
> > >
> > > GK: Whence?
> >
> > Somewhere in Asia, most likely.
> >
> > And the PIE land was uninhabited prior
> > > to their initial arrival?
> >
> > Extraneous to the scenario, so yes/no.
> >
> > > > PIEers mix with them.
> > > >
> > > > If this scenario is wrong, it should be provably
> > > > wrong. How?
> > >
> > > GK: Add the other specifics first.
> > > >
> >
> > No.
> > For this scenario to be proven wrong once and for
> > all, it should be
> > proven wrong for any possible value of the
> > parameters you ask me to
> > specify (and the number of possible values for each
> > parameter is
> > finite and relatively small, so it should be
> > practically possible
> > too). If I had provided any values, you might be
> > able to prove the
> > scenario wrong for exactly those values, but _not_
> > (obviously) for
> > any other given set of parameter values. So the
> > menace of this
> > scenario being possibly right would live on.
>
> ****GK: If "the number of possible values for each
> > parameter is
> > finite and relatively small", there sould be no
> objection to specific discussions. Personally, I'm not
> too interested in issues which abstract from such. But
> perhaps others are. It's up to them to sit down with
> you with the "appropriate" spoon.(:=)).****
>