> >Zick again exhibits his penchant for seeing things which do not exist. > >I am critical of your general claim, as you have not been able to > >bolster it with anything other than mere restatement of the claim itself. > > Which you appear unwilling or unable to evaluate.
I tend to resist acceptance of claims which are presented, as Zick's are, without persuasive evidence in support of them.
If one presents an axiom system and says "IF we assume this system such and such follows", and then presents some evidence the such and such actually does follow, I am much more accepting.
Zick claims to have things follow from nothing at all, and then presents no evidence.