>SJ>Argument from personal incredility Pim?>>
PM>Not at all.
Stephen: <<Your actual words were "is incredible" which if a creationist used it, on
your track record, you would immediately claim it was an "Argument from
personal incredility". You appear to have a double standard-one
for yourself and another for creationists.>>
If you have a better explanation on how these footnotes could have been added to the original then you have a point that the 'incredible' part is an argument from personal incredility. Otherwise it is just an argument from sarcasm.
Stephen: <<Another agreement! I don't think I can ake *two* agreements in *one*
night! :-)>>
I disagree...
Regards
Pim