"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

[snip]
The only thing left is to examine the statement that Steve is
continuing to get his chops busted over:

"Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio,"

Strictly speaking, One is not necessarily a member of MARS by virtue of
having an amateur license.

However, if a person was a civilian, they might be hard pressed to be a
member unless they had such a license.

Certainly, the amateur radio operator receiving training in the proper
traffic handling is the purpose of MARS.

So where one might want Steve to add "a part of" between "is" and
"amateur", I would remind everyone that this was in the context of a
reply to our good Hans, who has been known to engage in a bit of
hyperbole his own good self.


Actually based on the material you quoted, Steve's statement, based on the
rules of logic, is correct as it stands.

Actually, No. But you're thinking in the right direction.

Using logic, where "IS" means "EQUAL TO," MARS is not
equal to, or the same as Amateur Radio. The statement is false.

If Steve were to say that some (few, many, most, 99%, 90%, more than
80%, and/or 98%) MARS operators are also amateur radio operators, he
would have been correct. But he's switched his position on it so many
times, without ever having rejected his original statement, "Sorry
Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio," that we cannot tell where he
really stands on the subject.

A good first start to clearing up his position would be for him to
admit that MARS IS NOT Amateur Radio.

However, one must keep in mind
that under the rules of logic, a statement that is true as written, is not
necessarily true in the reverse direction.

It must be true in both directions. If it is not, then Algebra
contains only false statements. Is this the case?

In this case, the statement
"MARS is amateur radio" does NOT imply that it is the only element of
amateur radio

It does imply that. Nothing about a subset was uttered or implied.

and does NOT imply anything about the characteristics and
activities of amateur radio.

It does imply that. It implies that MARS is Amateur Radio. Even if
Steve were to have merely said that , "MARS IS _Exactly Like_
Amateur Radio," he would still have been wrong. He said that they
weren't exactly alike, he said that they were the very same thing!

That is to say, one cannot legitimately turn
the statement around to say that "amateur radio is MARS."

For the statement to be true, "turning the statement around" must also
be true. Transitive property.

Thanks, Dee, for setting the record straight.