Of course it is not verbatim the same, why would it be? It is a summary, a headline. The essence is still the same, however.
Hi Slobodan,
No, the essence still remains wrong, especially troubling coming from someone who occasionally tries to accuse others of Ad Hominem attacks. Not that Al Gore needs defending and, for the record, I do not agree with everything he says either.
But allow me to add just a friendly piece of advice;
When in hole stop digging.
Anyway, this exchange still has its value, IMHO, because it also (who'd have thunk it) demonstrates just another manifestation of another thread's topic (thanks to Alan K.):
"
Does a photo lie or its caption?"
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=125304.0As any summary or any news headline, it is supposed to summarize the essence of a more detailed event or statement.
Which it doesn't.
But let's, for the sake of argument, use the whole quote:
So, let's see:
DID...
Irrelevant, partly because hindsight has 20/20 vision (in fact it's a
very cheap,
and transparent, trick of an attempt to undermine someone's credibility). What's more, he apparently rephrased his recollection of someone else's remarks. As you yourself admitted, that's unlikely to be as accurate as a verbatim transcription.
Was he accurate? I don't know. You only supplied a suggestion that he was not, but an accurate kind of 'proof' was, as usual, missing. Innuendo only goes so far (as to discredit the one uttering it), but maybe (hopefully) you can still offer something more substantial (I know, I know, I''m an optimist).
Cheers,
Bart