Re: On "Electro-magnetic Energy--NOT--(Radiation?)"

"How can you talk about being blinded by word use."

That was not directed at you... but to those that may read these posts and take things ML and the both of us write at face value without looking things up and investigating for themselves...

This too can be a problem as some will come to a definitive thought or definition and be satisfied without exploring all the variations and possibilities... and perhaps the many variations on the definition as it may apply in different scientific circles/applications.

Most people tend to get sucked in by the emotional delivery of a thought, a passionate rebuttal... the heat of the discussion, and do not rationally look at what is being said OR what is trying to be communicated, effectively or not. Perhaps they just enjoy watching/witnessing a good spat :-)

Most people have weak Science backgrounds and do not fully comprehend much of this stuff anyway, not even bothering to understand if one side is right or not as it applies, let alone click on some/all of the scientific journals, university Science sites and papers linked, and then read them with comprehension.

To a point, "you" look at what is being said and dissect it for what it is. I admire you for that. This is what you do with most all of your posts; and you do it very well, albeit with a very narrow focus to support your position; but then, who doesn't?

Your posts can be very thought provoking; they can be, and most likely are, used as a springboard for a very few people who will take it upon themselves to read and take both your posts and ML's further before "taking sides" on the issues presented.

I have posted many times that I do not always agree with ML's posts, or the way ML presents his case, just as I do not always agree with yours, or the way you present... neither do I agree with everything either one of you believes in todo... not by a long shot.

But there are some things that I do strongly agree with each of you on...

Cheers Tweet