For David Millier

David,

That's a silly response from you. You and a few others responding continually want to change the goal post position to bolster your opinions. You have gone beyond the bounds of reason to try to avoid calling what is obviously lines what they are. In my opinion this is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

There are "lines" above Nyquist, period. That's all I've said since the beginning of this discussion and the evidence is incontrovertible. You and several others are continually trying to make a different discussion to suit your agenda. The original statement was this, and I quote,

"People can dilute themselves all they want but at the end of the day, there is no information about the scene above Nyquist."

The above statement is false. Attempts to draw me into your drama are useless. I said and I maintain, there are lines above Nyquist in this photo. Lines are "the scene" and therefore information about the scene exists above Nyquist. The lines are not imaginary, they are not created by "perceptions" or "expectations" they are not "fragments, slivers" or otherwise. They are quite real and they are, by definition, above Nyquist. It is indeed that simple and if you or others can't or "won't" see that simple fact, then further discussion with you about it is fruitless and a waste of bandwidth.

Lin

--
learntomakeslidshows.net