Re: Driving and 3d

[P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 01:15:04 -0500
>From: P3D Larry Berlin  <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Driving and 3d

>*****  Yes and no. You would certainly agree that a blindfolded person
>cannot get sufficient information for driving safely. Certainly at such
>extremes you do encounter a *yes or no* situation. That was not my point. In
>fact the main point was based on an opposite view.  I included the full
>continuum of visual and other sensory input to the situation.

My comment was a reply to George's comment. I *think* I was mostly agreeing
with you.

>******  In your quote you started with Dr. T quotes but included many of my
>replies to him as if they were part of what he was saying. The result is
>that you seem to disagree with what I was saying, except I was saying what
>you are trying to say. The context of both the quotes and your discussion
>about them got all mixed up in the process.

I went back and checked my post. Three "greater than" characters (>>>)
is George's earlier post, two characters (>>) is your reply to George,
and one character (>) is George's subsequent reply to you. All the
attributions are correct, except that I did not note that you were the
second poster. (If your mail reader strips off the (>) signs, I'm sorry - 
I can't help.)

To reiterate, I was generally in agreement with what you had posted, but
disagreed with what I had interpreted George's posts to mean. (But now
that George has restated his question, I believe it to be worth further
consideration.)

John R


------------------------------