Julian Dyer wrote, "My comments on the Pistonola were a reaction to
the feeling I was getting from earlier notes that when something is
not easily understood then it must be wrong!"

This is a technique that is well known to homo bovinus.  It goes
something like this:

  1. I hear your statement.
  2. I don't understand it.
  3. I restate it (warp it) into something (incorrect)
     that I do understand.
  4. I declare the result to be wrong.

Step 4 is usually announced in a a somewhat exaggerated tone of voice
laced with a tinge of indignity.

Here is an example:

  1. Statement received is: "The reason we know there is an external
reality, independent of any particular correlation, is because we are
always considering whether or not there is one."

  2. Huh?

  3. All I know is what's in front of me.  You mean if I can
see it and touch it that doesn't mean it's really there?

  4. You're full of s---.

Further examples of this are endless.

George Bogatko
http://www.inluxeditions.com