Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 6 Oct 2006 12:53 On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:27:40 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >John Fields wrote: >> >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:09:50 +0100, Eeyore wrote: >> >> >> >Let me make this clearer. >> >> > >> >> >Who *exactly* do you mean ? >> >> >> >> What, you want _names_? >> > >> >That would be a start. Something more coherent than 'radical islam' for >> >example. >> >> --- >> Too bad a simple concept is so hard for you to grasp when it's other >> than American. > >No. It's *not* a simple concept you fuckwitted simpleton. --- You're the only one who seems to be struggling with it --- >Who *are* these ppl ? --- Who knows? Might be your next-door neighbors, might be mine. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: John Fields on 6 Oct 2006 12:55 On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:29:04 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >JoeBloe wrote: >> >>"Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> Gave us: >> >> >> >> >Facts you are unaware of? >> >> > >> >> >Other national: "I feel bad so I'll talk to my friends" >> >> > >> >> >American: "I feel bad so I'll murder some innocent people" >> >> > >> >> You're an idiot. Euro nations were slaughtering thousands long >> >> before we ever did. >> > >> >Most Americans are Europeans. >> >> --- >> No, most Americans have ascended from European roots. >> >> No Americans are Europeans except the ones that hold dual >> citizenship in the US and also in some European state. > >Obfuscation. > --- Clarification. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: T Wake on 6 Oct 2006 12:58 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:4525D26C.C2FF6B64(a)earthlink.net... >T Wake wrote: >> >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:45258C8B.9627D77F(a)earthlink.net... >> >T Wake wrote: >> >> >> >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >> >> news:45257252.1B92CFF9(a)earthlink.net... >> >> >T Wake wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Ouch. You cutting wit has shamed me. I do apologise. >> >> >> >> >> >> However, as you feel able to invade our newsgroup with crossposted >> >> >> bullshit >> >> >> (and imply your rules are more acceptable) I must bow to your >> >> >> masterful >> >> >> double standards. >> >> > >> >> > Yawn. >> >> >> >> If you spent less time trying to sling insults, you may get enough >> >> sleep >> >> to >> >> read through a full post. >> > >> > >> > My sleep problems are medical, and not really of any importance to >> > you. >> >> I agree, they are not even slightly important or interesting to me. >> >> On the other hand, I find it interesting you need to type out your >> yawning. >> Most people would just yawn and continue to type. >> >> Still, I suspect you are not most people. > > > YAWN = Not very intersting reply to me. Sarcasm is obviously a British trait. > How long have you been on > Usenet? > Today, about three hours.
From: T Wake on 6 Oct 2006 13:02 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:4525DD64.ED5DFD8A(a)earthlink.net... > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:4525D26C.C2FF6B64(a)earthlink.net... >> > >> > YAWN = Not very intersting reply to me. How long have you been on >> > Usenet? >> >> No, "not very interesting reply to me" means you just skip it and move >> on. >> YAWN is "I'm trying to impress you with how big/smart/important/well-hung >> I >> am by telling you your reply is beneath me, and screaming it at you." At >> least be honest with yourself. >> >> Eric Lucas > > > You have your definition, I have mine. Yet he does have a point. In sci.physics on any given day there are three or four hundred posts which are not interesting. Lots are replies to my posts which I don't find interesting. I tend to ignore them. If I posted "yawn" at everything which didn't interest me I'd need a new keyboard pretty soon. (IMHO Obviously) It does seem that people who post things like "I don't care what you think" or "Yawn" or "Plonk" are just trying a bit of one-upmanship which is very suited to under tens.
From: T Wake on 6 Oct 2006 13:12
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:4525D336.EE9277D9(a)earthlink.net... > YD wrote: >> >> Positively so. All you have left is posing as powerful know-it-alls on >> the internet. >> >> Ever tried to figure what you look like to those outside of your tight >> little circle of cronies? > > > What's wrong? Did your only "friend" blow out his brains to get away > from you? I am 100% disabled, but it doesn't keep me stuck at home. I > can still do some work, some days so I do volunteer work to help other > disabled people in my area. You, on the other hand are always bitter, > and trying to slam anyone who has a clue. > This is a logical fallacy. Everything you have said can be true and still it would not disprove anything YD has written. Insulting someone does not change the validity of their comments, nor does eliciting sympathy for yourself. |