Re: Spoiler--Down to 3 (4/21/2008)

"Brian Smith" <dcg_brian@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> The GP question only had a verifiable answer if we use your convoluted 
> definitions.

My "convoluted definitions" come from dictionaries. The purpose of a 
dictionary is to provide a common frame of reference for communication. 
Dismissing a dictionary definition only inhibits your ability to
understand 
and communicate.



The GP toy question is totally unverifiable because even if the
> answer is "fiction" BB could have easily said "fact" and just added in
one 
> last twist to the game. A simple "expect the unexpected" would do.
>
> You're totally off base about Amanda. Are you saying that the hospital 
> allowed their name to be used as part of a scam on viewers?



I told you that I wasn't serious about those theories (but I have to say 
you're making a weak argument since a hospital can neither confirm nor
deny 
the purpose of a patient's visit).  I was making the point that you can't 
verify the accuracy of the other answers given. The GP answer was verified

in a manner that satisfies the dictionary definitions of every word in the

question, you just choose not to accept that answer. And I find your 
intolerance toward these hypothetical conspiracy theories rather amusing 
given that you have your own.