🚀 go-pugleaf

MF:

The following are Elliott Ito's statements, so I can't answer for him.  
I am glad to know that you think at least ten species will be discovered 
in the next six months, or don't you believe this is the case?


> >
> >(quote)
> >
> >Let me repeat the wager:
> >
> >You insist the postulation of the existence of undiscovered species is
> >not only
> >unjustified,
> 
> I would be interested in where I said this.  I looked over the recent
> exchange (mostly with Braun & Jim), and I believe this statement is a
> misrepresentation.
> 
> >but has such a high probability of being wrong, that NO
> >ATTENTION whatsoever must be paid to their preservation.
> 
> More misrepresentation, in my opinion.
> 
> >(and anyone who
> >thinks otherwise should sell his wife & kids to slavers and go hug trees
> >or some similar rational advice).
> 
> Again, I would be interested in what might have said from which this
> is a reasonable inference.
> 
> >OK then.
> >Wager that less than 10 new species will be discovered the next 6
> >months.
> 
> Ah, you think I am stupid enough to believe that this is a fair
> representation of what I said.  No wonder some "environmentalists"
> will not quote give cites.  If the misrepresent the citations as
> grossly as they misrepresent what I post, I am sure they do not want
> anyone to look it up!  Tell you what, if you wish to bet the sun won't
> rise tomorrow, I will take that.  The bet is a stupid bet, based on a
> misrepresentation of my statements.
> 
> >(By your reasoning 0 new species will be discovered, but I'm giving you
> >some leeway - yes, I'm that magnanimous. Even Brashears deserves a
> >chance).
> 
> Again, this is a misrepresentation of what I said.  I have now read
> the thread in my archives.  It was called "Limits to Growth", and the
> subject of disagreement concerned the hypothesis of species, followed
> by a hypothesis of their loss, and the demand that the world needs to
> do something to correct that immediately.
> 
> Due to my own inability to articulate, I was unable to communicate
> that these individuals were very anxious for some Brazilian peasant to
> cease making a living because of a hypothesized species loss based on
> hypothesized species!
> 
> I must apologize for my inability to communicate properly.  I wish I
> could have seen the post earlier, since I hate to allow such willful
> misrepresentation of my statements from being spread.  Thank you for
> bringing this to my attention Mark.
> 

MF:

Certainly, Harold.  I wish you had seen it earlier as well.  No one 
wants to dig a pit for someone else, stumble into it themselves, then 
have to go through a struggle to extricate themselves by blaming the 
intended victim for their misfortune.  I like to think I'm doing my part 
to prevent this occurrance.

Mark Friesel