Patrick Elliott wrote:
> nor an invalidation of Warp's claim. 

Or, to put it another way, it seems very odd to say "No, your definition is 
wrong", and when I ask "Well, what's the right definition, then?" for the 
other party to go on the defensive. I find it's very rare for someone to 
claim that the definition of a scientific word is wrong without actually 
being able to specify what they think the definition is.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message