Liza - I'm glad you're enjoying this :)
let me try once again...

...just because you haven't proved something, doesn't mean it might not
exist.  It might exist. It also might not exist. You simply haven't proved
it.

this is sounding very philosophical.
Lucia


> > 1. just because you can't prove something that "doesn't mean it might
not
> > exist"
> > 2. just because you can't prove something "doesn't mean it doesn't
exist"


On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Liza May wrote:

> Hi Carol and Lucia!
>
> LOL LOL LOL HA!!  :D
>
> Oh my gosh, this is hilarious!! You two would make a grreat
> comedy team - especially because you are so SINCERE, and so
> cheerful, and you got lost so honestly. It kind of snuck up
> on you! lol lol. Reminds me of how confusedly out in the
> ozone I generally feel most of the time.
>
> > Carol:
> > > > > I disagree.  If something has not been proven to exist, that most
> > > > > certainly DOES mean that it might not exist.
>
> > > Lucia:
> > > > well of course, it means it might not exist.... Still, scientifically,
> > > > just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>
> > > Carol:
> > > Of course not.  But you said "That doesn't mean it might not exist"
> > > which is something else entirely.
>
> Lucia:
> > To my mind, these two statements are the same:
> > 1. just because you can't prove something that "doesn't mean it might not
> > exist"
> > 2. just because you can't prove something "doesn't mean it doesn't exist"
> > we're in the twilight zone. not sure how I got here...
>
> Liza:
> HA!! HHHHeeeeelllpppp somebody, please! :D I'm hopelessly
> lost! Logicians, please - Jean-Louis? Tom? Help! Help! lol
> lol lol ...
>
> Love Liza
>
> --
> [log in to unmask] (Liza May)
>