factual potential truths

the emperor has no clothes, man.

that's amusing in its absurdity -- sounds like they're confirming or denying what they've done to me...

I don't see the problem.

Isn't that just treating something as a fact even though it isn't for the sake of argument?

Seems pretty clear to me what they mean..

It's a hearing to see if the department has done anything wrong; I highly doubt the department would admit to wrongdoing, even hypothetical, if it didn't actually do it.

It's perfectly valid for the purpose of considering the issues.

All they're basically saying, as I understand it, is:

"If the department had done X, would that be wrong or should they be allowed to do it?"

"agreed hypothetical events" is fine for deciding on issues Jamiet. Facts are facts.

Rather than putting it in quotes and saying it is what was said, why doesn't someone link to the actual document or recorded statement.

Then you can argue over what was actually said. Was it facts or events...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28286105

@Draugnar: Can't we just agree to the hypothetical facts presented, for the sake of argument?

@Everyone:
See? That's how you use the term in a sentence. It prevents you from needing proof before discussing something.

Steephie - you can't have a hypothetical fact.

If the law says the speed limit is 30mph then you can ask "If, hypothetically, I drove at 35mph to ensure my wife got to hospital would that be OK?" You could even say as a fact "I drove at 35mph to ensure my wife got to hospital, is that OK." But you can't say "hypothetically I drove at 35mph...". What happens if it isn't OK are you going to get a hypothetical prison sentence with hypothetical time off for good behaviour?

"agreed hypothetical facts"....ahhh ha ha...I thougth for sure this was going to be a global warming thread! lol

My Corvette could hypothetically do 185MPH. That is a hypothetical fact. But I never got it up that fast (172 was the fastest I drove it). Hence it is a hypothetical fact.

Checking the details of a second-hand Corvette is very much like making love to a beautiful woman. First of all, verify her year of origin. She may look like she rolled off the production line in 1997 but who's to say the fellow before you didn't give her a good spraying?

My Corvette was a 1993 chipped, ported, and ram aired by Doug Rippie Motorsports. The only way to verify it's top speed would be to drive it at that speed. Seeing as I no longer own it and tracking it down might or might not even get you access to it, you mist either agree to this hypothetical fact or not.

"My Corvette could hypothetically do 185MPH. "

Don't you mean your hypothetical Corvette? Or did you trade in your hypothetical Benz?

Draug, I'd disagree taht the top speed of your Corvette is an "agreed hypothetical fact" -- it isn't hypothetical, because Corvette's have hit that speed - so it's more grounded than mere hypothosis.

Global warming "agreed hypothetical facts" on the other hand are PURE hypothosis, with their only basis as "facts" being based upon computer models.

Huge difference between the top speed of your car and the AHF's of a fraudulent science. heh heh....<waiting for fun, enthusiastic replies from the monkey gallery…

Oh so you traded in your make-believe Corvette for a make-believe Benz. Got it. When will you get a make-believe Maserati?

Waiting for a monkey to appear is a bit like making love to a beautiful woman. You've got to be patient, keep your eyes on the undergrowth, and always have your nuts handy.

This is about a surveillance system and whether it broke the law in the UK, krellin. So my hypothetical fact of my Vette is closer to the question at hand as they are probably discussing the hypothetical capabilities of said system.