[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

RedBean,

I assume that you not replying to this and the next post is admitting that you were at least mostly wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently, you also assume that your belief based on conclusions drawn from circumstantial evidence somehow constitutes an admission by Bonds.

Let's see if we can break this down real simple:

Just because YOU think the substances were PED's, does not mean that HE admitted using PED's....because he never admitted any such thing.

<u>False statement:</u>
Bonds admitted using PED's.

<u>True statment:</u>
Bond's admitted using substances to which YOU believe based on circumstantial allegations to be PED's.

See the difference?

Here, just to be clear, le's walk through the logical fallacy here and see if you can identify it:

1. Bonds admitted using a substance.
2. YOU believe the substance to be PED's.
3. thus...Bonds admitted using PED's????

See the part where you make the leap from your own conclusions to asserting that it was his own admission?

Oops....

<u>Short form:</u>
Assumption on your part does not constitute and admission on his part.

<u>FACTS</u>:
1. Barry Bonds did not admit taking PED's to the grand jury.
2. Barry Bonds has not violated the MLB Steroid Policy.

Everything else is speculation, assumption, and conclusion being drawn from selectively leaked circumstantial allegations.