Scaling

[Ron Nossaman]

At 12:15 AM 4/2/98 EST, you wrote:
>In a message dated 98-04-01 23:05:17 EST, you write:
>
><< BillRPT
> 
> I believe you've been had.
> 
> Dale
>  >>
>Well, now I really do just HATE April Fools jokes.  I took Ron's question
>seriously even though he did embellish it a little.  It is indeed an often
>asked question about whether string tensions of HT's go contrary to a piano
>which is assumed to have been designed for ET as many want so feverishly to
>believe.
>
>But if it turns out that I responded politely, dryly and seriously to nothing
>more than a joke, you can be sure that there will be nothing from me but
><<«FLAMES»>> from now on!
>
>It's not NICE to fool mother nature!
>
>Bill
>


Calm down folks, nobody has been 'had'. I chose that particular subject to
annoy you all with because it struck me as right on the edge of
plausibility. On one hand, the flakiest theory you can conceive can be made
almost believable if you can tie in enough loosely related facts.
Conversely, a most serious subject can be made to appear inconsequential by
throwing in enough diversionary fringe elements to dilute credibility. Like
SO MUCH of this profession, what is gospel, what is debatable, and what is
nonsense depends on where you stand when looking at it. I whipped up a class
'B' borderline concept, added a dash of salt, and went fishing to see who
would respond, and with what. I did it for fun, just to stir the pot.
Guilty, but if any of you out there are looking at scorecards of the
results, it's your own call, not mine. 

Smile while you can. We start getting up an hour earlier Sunday. (I, for
one, plan to RESIST)


 Ron Nossaman