numbers..final

[claudia castellani]

Ah, ok!! Now it's clear.
Thank you for the explanation, Pieter!!!
Best regards,  Claudia


>From: pieter pannevis <ppaPP.MYADSL.NL>

>Dear Claudia,
>   I'm afraid you missed the link to the Spanish site
>At that point (and not it the plain text) came forward that the numbers for
>only religious (as Rosina stated) and those of religious AND cultural were
>added and THAN came to a more than 95%.
>My claim is that if you state religious it's religious and not religious
>and
>cultural.
>AS a lawyer (as Rosina is) she has to be correct on presenting the case and
>numbers correctly!
>
>She stated that over the years etc etc....
>Which isn't simply true
>
>Here I stop for it annoys me.
>Main thing is that it's hardly likely that 95 % are religious as earlier
>remarks presents.
>I do not care about statistics; I care for the correct forwarding of data;
>that's all
>For your benefit I introduce the link again where you can see how they
>added
>cultural to religious:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/2dkyh
>
>
>On the other hand my findings as published by the archdiocese over the
>years
>state simply about 70 %
>
>Kind regards to you and all !
>
>
>
>pieter, trigo and mickey
>duifhuis 58,
>3862 jj Nijkerk
>the Netherlands
>mailto:pieterpannevisagmx.net

_________________________________________________________________
Scarica gratuitamente MSN Toolbar! http://toolbar.msn.it/