"Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 16 May 2005 18:54:58 -0400, "Scott Hedrick"
wrote:
How does the promise of money offered as a prize for completion of a
task
mean that actual money is being allocated to accomplish that task?

It gives credibility to the project, by proving that there's enough
serious interest in the goal that's its worth investing in.

Perhaps, but that doesn't answer the question. How does the promise of money
offered as a prize for completion of a task show that actual money *is being
allocated*, as opposed to *could be allocated*,to accomplish that task?
Being able to answer that question means that you can also *name* the
organizations actually spending non-prize money- if you cannot name names,
then you're *assuming* that money is being spent.

It worked
for Lindbergh and McCready, to name just two who raised the money to
accomplish tasks that carried prizes for the first to do them.

That means that it *could work* to improve EVA capability, but that isn't my
question. Rand insists that the existence of a prize itself means that money
*is* being spent, but admits he doesn't care enough to find out who. That
means that he *cannot* provide any supporting evidence for his claims, but
he's not man enough to admit it or to even admit the possibility of error.
He fails to understand his assumptions, no matter how logical they may
sound, are not *facts* without supporting evidence.