Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
>> news:FWQFi.3236$1n1.2918@trnddc02...
>>> "Alexm" > wrote in message
>>> ups.com...
>>>> On Sep 11, 9:35 pm, zxcvbob > wrote:
>>>>> Alexm wrote:
>>>>>> My question is independent of the number of tomatoes on hand here.
> I
>>>>>> merely want to know if (rather expensive) sun dried tomatoes can be
>>>>>> prepared at home in a simple and fairly quick manner anytime one
>>>>>> wishes..
>>>>> The answer is yes, but only if you have a food dehydrator.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>> O.K., thanks for the tip.
>>>>
>>> Bear in mind the huge difference between sun dried and merely
> dehydrated.
>>> Sun drying brings out the natural sugars and intensifies the flavors.
>>> Drying does not accomplish this. Prunes and dried plumbs are quite
>>> different, for example. When I want sun dried tomatoes, I just buy
> them.
>>> They aren't all that expensive. I mostly use them in salads and
> sometimes
>>> pizza. Not an everyday item.
>>>
>>> Paul
>> Why or how does the heat from the sun work differently than another source
>> of heat?
>
> Don't forget what sunlight is. Light. And that light has a lot of
> components, heat being just one of them.
>
> Paul
>


You're just making this up now, after having gone too far in your
previous post, right? ;-)

Bob

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
> > "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> >> news:FWQFi.3236$1n1.2918@trnddc02...
> >>> "Alexm" > wrote in message
> >>> ups.com...
> >>>> On Sep 11, 9:35 pm, zxcvbob > wrote:
> >>>>> Alexm wrote:
> >>>>>> My question is independent of the number of tomatoes on hand here.
> > I
> >>>>>> merely want to know if (rather expensive) sun dried tomatoes can be
> >>>>>> prepared at home in a simple and fairly quick manner anytime one
> >>>>>> wishes..
> >>>>> The answer is yes, but only if you have a food dehydrator.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bob
> >>>> O.K., thanks for the tip.
> >>>>
> >>> Bear in mind the huge difference between sun dried and merely
> > dehydrated.
> >>> Sun drying brings out the natural sugars and intensifies the flavors.
> >>> Drying does not accomplish this. Prunes and dried plumbs are quite
> >>> different, for example. When I want sun dried tomatoes, I just buy
> > them.
> >>> They aren't all that expensive. I mostly use them in salads and
> > sometimes
> >>> pizza. Not an everyday item.
> >>>
> >>> Paul
> >> Why or how does the heat from the sun work differently than another
source
> >> of heat?
> >
> > Don't forget what sunlight is. Light. And that light has a lot of
> > components, heat being just one of them.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
>
> You're just making this up now, after having gone too far in your
> previous post, right? ;-)


No Bob, I am not making up a god damned thing. It is simple chemistry and
if you paid attention in high school you may have learned it, too. Sun
drying is a lot different than simply dehydrating something. A whole lot
different. It is a photochemical process

OK, prunes for example. Dried plumbs right? Prunes can relieve you of
constipation, plumbs don't. Why is this? Because the sunlight changes the
phenols in the plumbs into phenolphthaleins (yellow in this case), which
causes your colon to excrete water thus giving you diarrhea. The sunlight
does this. Dehydrating plumbs in an oven won't do this. Did you observe
the word light? Light is amazing stuff, it allows plants to make food for
example. Whoa! brain freeze!!! Food from light? Impossible you say??
Well no. Sunlight also changes simple carbohydrates and moisture into
sugars by activating natural enzymes in the fruit. Plumbs are loaded with
carbohydrates and sun drying greatly increases the sugars. The same goes
for tomatoes. Sun drying will intensify the natural sugars while
dehydrating won't. It will concentrate the flavors simply by removing
water.

What I say may seem "too far" to you but that is more an example of how
little you know more than anything else. But then if you knew how ignorant
you were, you wouldn't be ignorant now would you?

Now go into the light of knowledge my son. And do wear sunblock, light can
burn your skin. It can, really.

Paul

"Randy Johnson" > wrote in message
t...
>
> On 12-Sep-2007, "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > OK, prunes for example. Dried plumbs right? Prunes can relieve you of
> > constipation, plumbs don't. Why is this? Because the sunlight changes
> > the
> > phenols in the plumbs into phenolphthaleins (yellow in this case), which
> > causes your colon to excrete water thus giving you diarrhea. The
sunlight
> > does this. Dehydrating plumbs in an oven won't do this. Did you
observe
> > the word light? Light is amazing stuff, it allows plants to make food
for
> > example. Whoa! brain freeze!!! Food from light? Impossible you say??
> > Well no. Sunlight also changes simple carbohydrates and moisture into
> > sugars by activating natural enzymes in the fruit. Plumbs are loaded
with
> > carbohydrates and sun drying greatly increases the sugars. The same
goes
> > for tomatoes. Sun drying will intensify the natural sugars while
> > dehydrating won't. It will concentrate the flavors simply by removing
> > water.
>
> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
spell
> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
> reference material to substantiate.


Of course it does. One misspelled word (I'll blame it on the spell czecker)
and I have NO CREDIBILITY. Look it up on Google, Einstein - or find some
other research monkey. But since I misspelled plum, how could you possibly
trust any source I supplied? Your credibility argument is so old as to be
trite.

> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed it
> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect.

Fiber does not give you diarrhea. Bulk laxative are just that - bulk. You
get diarrhea from prunes due to the fact that the chemical I mentioned
causes your colon to release large amounts of water. Fiber does the
reverse, it holds on to water thus softening stools which help relieve
constipation. Fiber therapies take 24-48 hours to show results, you get
relief with prunes in less than 6. Or at least I do anyway. And best not
be far from a bathroom when they kick in - have mercy. You don't get that
effect with Metamucil.

> It seems
> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve some
> sort of fiber. As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.

The only problem is that you're wrong. But don't let that affect your
opinion.

Paul

> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
spell
> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
> reference material to sustantiate.
>

Ummmm is not a word and that last sentence is a question and not properly
punctuted as such.

> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed it
> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve some
> sort of fiber.

Misuse of a comma.

> As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.

Misuse of a comma. Improper use of a semicolon.

> -------------
> Standing tall, ready to serve

Then what's stopping you?

Paul

"Randy Johnson" > wrote in message
...
>
> On 12-Sep-2007, "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > > Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
> > spell
> > > plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
> > > reference material to substantiate.
> >
> >
> > Of course it does. One misspelled word (I'll blame it on the spell
> > czecker)
> > and I have NO CREDIBILITY. Look it up on Google, Einstein - or find
some
> > other research monkey. But since I misspelled plum, how could you
> > possibly
> > trust any source I supplied? Your credibility argument is so old as to
be
> > trite.
> >
> > > Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed
> > > it
> > > was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect.
> >
> > Fiber does not give you diarrhea.
>
> Certainly we all have typo's and occasionally spell a word incorrectly;
but,
> when it is such a simple word and spelled incorrectly numerous times, it
> makes the author appear to be sloppy at best, undereducated at worst.
When
> spelled incorrectly in a message whose subject the author is claiming some
> expertise, it does, indeed, damage credibility.
>


You really need an editor as you seem to be punctuation challenged. Until
then, you will continue to display your own lack of "credibility."

Paul

On Sep 12, 5:57 pm, Peter A > wrote:
> In article >, bigeasy254
> @aol.com says...
>
> > Certainly we all have typo's
>
> LOL! Typo's, that's rich.

I literally laughed out loud at that too, Though I guess the
apostrophe could have represented "graphical error."
>
> --
> Peter Aitken

--Bryan

"Randy Johnson" > wrote in message
t...

> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
> spell
> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
> reference material to sustantiate.
>
> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed it
> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve some
> sort of fiber. As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.

Yep. I know people who OD'd on plums. It wasn't good.

On Sep 12, 11:06 am, Steve Wertz > wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:29:54 -0700, Alexm wrote:
> > At the moment I have one tomato which I can experiment with.
>
> Why don't you make a taco out of it with all the suggestions you
> received on that thread? Or put it on one of those butter and
> pepper hot dogs?
>
> Or sure - stick it in the microwave for 55 minutes on high. I
> would try and use at least 2 tomatoes, though.
>
> -sw

The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's I
took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves. Now I have to get
more tomatoes to do the sun dried thing using some of the posted
methods but not yours of course. I want something other than a pile
of black dust. ( : - ]

AlexM

On Sep 12, 4:46 pm, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:
> "Randy Johnson" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 12-Sep-2007, "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
> > > > Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
> > > spell
> > > > plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
> > > > reference material to substantiate.
>
> > > Of course it does. One misspelled word (I'll blame it on the spell
> > > czecker)
> > > and I have NO CREDIBILITY. Look it up on Google, Einstein - or find
> some
> > > other research monkey. But since I misspelled plum, how could you
> > > possibly
> > > trust any source I supplied? Your credibility argument is so old as to
> be
> > > trite.
>
> > > > Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed
> > > > it
> > > > was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect.
>
> > > Fiber does not give you diarrhea.
>
> > Certainly we all have typo's and occasionally spell a word incorrectly;
> but,
> > when it is such a simple word and spelled incorrectly numerous times, it
> > makes the author appear to be sloppy at best, undereducated at worst.
> When
> > spelled incorrectly in a message whose subject the author is claiming some
> > expertise, it does, indeed, damage credibility.
>
> You really need an editor as you seem to be punctuation challenged. Until
> then, you will continue to display your own lack of "credibility."

Really. I'm someone who believes that commas can be used fairly
flexibly, within certain limits, but it really is funny that people
tend to screw up worse when they are doing the grammar cop thing, than
otherwise.

Years ago, Sears did a study on falls on their floors when wet. They
found that people fell more often on shiny floors, even controlling
for actual slipperiness. Surprisingly, they found that people fell
more often on shiny floors *even if* they were more slip resistant
(and they also controlled for folks seeking damages). The conclusion
was that people walked more carefully on wet floors that looked as if
they would be slippery, and that this would make them less
coordinated, since they'd have a less natural gait.

Perhaps it's the same when people are being unusually vigilant about
their writing.
>
> Paul

--Bryan

"Alexm" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Sep 12, 11:06 am, Steve Wertz > wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:29:54 -0700, Alexm wrote:
>> > At the moment I have one tomato which I can experiment with.
>>
>> Why don't you make a taco out of it with all the suggestions you
>> received on that thread? Or put it on one of those butter and
>> pepper hot dogs?
>>
>> Or sure - stick it in the microwave for 55 minutes on high. I
>> would try and use at least 2 tomatoes, though.
>>
>> -sw
>
> The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's I
> took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
> cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
> The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves.

Strange --- very strange!! e.

"elaine" > wrote

> "Alexm" > wrote

>> The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's I
>> took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
>> cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
>> The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves.
>
> Strange --- very strange!! e.

(laugh!)

nancy

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:18:05 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> wrote:

>
>> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
>spell
>> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
>> reference material to sustantiate.
>>
>
>Ummmm is not a word and that last sentence is a question and not properly
>punctuted as such.
>
wrong.

>> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed it
>> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
>> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve some
>> sort of fiber.
>
>Misuse of a comma.
>
wrong.
>> As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
>> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
>> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.
>
>Misuse of a comma. Improper use of a semicolon.
>
comma's o.k. first semicolon should be a colon.
>> -------------
>> Standing tall, ready to serve
>
so, paul, you're one for five. pretty lousy, even for a grammar nazi.
but feel free to gig me for incomplete sentences if you feel you must.

your pal,
blake

your pal,
blake

"Bobo Bonobo®" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Sep 12, 4:46 pm, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
> > "Randy Johnson" > wrote in message
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 12-Sep-2007, "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your
inability to
> > > > spell
> > > > > plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could
cite
> > > > > reference material to substantiate.
> >
> > > > Of course it does. One misspelled word (I'll blame it on the spell
> > > > czecker)
> > > > and I have NO CREDIBILITY. Look it up on Google, Einstein - or find
> > some
> > > > other research monkey. But since I misspelled plum, how could you
> > > > possibly
> > > > trust any source I supplied? Your credibility argument is so old as
to
> > be
> > > > trite.
> >
> > > > > Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just
assumed
> > > > > it
> > > > > was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect.
> >
> > > > Fiber does not give you diarrhea.
> >
> > > Certainly we all have typo's and occasionally spell a word
incorrectly;
> > but,
> > > when it is such a simple word and spelled incorrectly numerous times,
it
> > > makes the author appear to be sloppy at best, undereducated at worst.
> > When
> > > spelled incorrectly in a message whose subject the author is claiming
some
> > > expertise, it does, indeed, damage credibility.
> >
> > You really need an editor as you seem to be punctuation challenged.
Until
> > then, you will continue to display your own lack of "credibility."
>
> Really. I'm someone who believes that commas can be used fairly
> flexibly, within certain limits, but it really is funny that people
> tend to screw up worse when they are doing the grammar cop thing, than
> otherwise.
>
> Years ago, Sears did a study on falls on their floors when wet. They
> found that people fell more often on shiny floors, even controlling
> for actual slipperiness. Surprisingly, they found that people fell
> more often on shiny floors *even if* they were more slip resistant
> (and they also controlled for folks seeking damages). The conclusion
> was that people walked more carefully on wet floors that looked as if
> they would be slippery, and that this would make them less
> coordinated, since they'd have a less natural gait.
>
> Perhaps it's the same when people are being unusually vigilant about
> their writing.


I'm going with a simpler explanation. It's like being called on a statement
about how the sun works, ignorant people do not realize they are ignorant.
This leads to a general smugness often manifested by chiding and nitpicking
behavior. Sort of like, if I act smarter, everyone will just assume I am.
Yet for all their brilliance, they couldn't look up something through Google
if they had to so they demand that you do it for them. And then they reject
it as not worthy of their intelligence. Then they point to a misspelled
word and claim proof of your lack of credibility.

Paul

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:18:05 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
>>spell
>>> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
>>> reference material to sustantiate.
>>>
>>
>>Ummmm is not a word and that last sentence is a question and not properly
>>punctuted as such.
>>
> wrong.

I guess you can't spell substantiate very well, either.

>
>>> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed
>>> it
>>> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
>>> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve
>>> some
>>> sort of fiber.
>>
>>Misuse of a comma.
>>
> wrong.

No, I am right. The second sentence is awkward because it breaks the
meaning into 2 thoughts the last being incomplete. You use a comma to
seperate elements in a series, usually when an element is not critical to
the meaning being conveyed and not used when the sentence begins with a
strong clause. And that is what we have here.

>>> As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
>>> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
>>> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.
>>
>>Misuse of a comma. Improper use of a semicolon.
>>
> comma's o.k. first semicolon should be a colon.

No it should be a period. A colon is used after an independent clause that
precedes a list. And that is not what we have in that sentence.

>>> -------------
>>> Standing tall, ready to serve
>>
> so, paul, you're one for five. pretty lousy, even for a grammar nazi.
> but feel free to gig me for incomplete sentences if you feel you must.

You proved a lot, genius - but English proficiency is not on the list. I
think considering the incredible display of your own ignorance regarding the
rules of grammar, not to mention capitalization, I will pass on your
generous offer.

Nice try, though - better luck next time.

Paul

Paul M. Cook wrote:

>
> I'm going with a simpler explanation. It's like being called on a statement
> about how the sun works, ignorant people do not realize they are ignorant.
> This leads to a general smugness often manifested by chiding and nitpicking
> behavior. Sort of like, if I act smarter, everyone will just assume I am.
> Yet for all their brilliance, they couldn't look up something through Google
> if they had to so they demand that you do it for them. And then they reject
> it as not worthy of their intelligence. Then they point to a misspelled
> word and claim proof of your lack of credibility.
>
> Paul


Did anybody else's irony meter just break a needle?

Best regards,
Bob

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm going with a simpler explanation. It's like being called on a
>> statement
>> about how the sun works, ignorant people do not realize they are
>> ignorant.
>> This leads to a general smugness often manifested by chiding and
>> nitpicking
>> behavior. Sort of like, if I act smarter, everyone will just assume I
>> am.
>> Yet for all their brilliance, they couldn't look up something through
>> Google
>> if they had to so they demand that you do it for them. And then they
>> reject
>> it as not worthy of their intelligence. Then they point to a misspelled
>> word and claim proof of your lack of credibility.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
> Did anybody else's irony meter just break a needle?
>

On Sep 13, 11:55 am, Steve Wertz > wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:37:00 -0700, Alexm wrote:
> > The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's I
> > took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
> > cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
> > The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves. Now I have to get
> > more tomatoes to do the sun dried thing using some of the posted
> > methods but not yours of course. I want something other than a pile
> > of black dust. ( : - ]
>
> That must have been a heartbreaking decision for this prized
> tomato - to sun-dry this one, lone tomato, or to use it on
> McDonalds hamburgers.
>
> How did you sleep?
>
> -sw

Well, I was sitting on a barstool in front of that tomato minding my
own business while mulling over this problem. I kept asking myself
whether to sun-dry or not to sun-dry. In the meantrime the sky got
cloudy and it became nearly noon. It was around then I considered a
different option and began asking myself whether to slice or not to
slice. Whether to dry or not to dry seemed less important . I even
began talking out loud to myself about all this. (As a matter of note
it slowly became rather clear to me that the tomato did not react at
all and, indeed, remained remarkably aloof ). The clock struck noon
and McDonald's arches viividly flashed into my mind - and the rest
is history. Later I slept very well because, I reasoned, no matter
what happened that tomato was to be eventually devoured. Furthermore
slicing and eating was a much more humane process than what would have
been the long and slow torture of drying and eating. On the downside
- the vision of that once beautiful tomato returns to haunt me once
in a while. But what the heck, if it were not for me that tomato could
just as well have ended up in Famous Dave's Texas Pit BBQ
Sauce.instead of inside a wonderful plain cheeeseburger at McDonald's.

AlexM

Alexm > wrote in news:1189744148.937986.133260@
22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com:

> On Sep 13, 11:55 am, Steve Wertz > wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:37:00 -0700, Alexm wrote:
>> > The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's
I
>> > took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
>> > cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
>> > The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves. Now I have to
get
>> > more tomatoes to do the sun dried thing using some of the posted
>> > methods but not yours of course. I want something other than a pile
>> > of black dust. ( : - ]
>>
>> That must have been a heartbreaking decision for this prized
>> tomato - to sun-dry this one, lone tomato, or to use it on
>> McDonalds hamburgers.
>>
>> How did you sleep?
>>
>> -sw
>
> Well, I was sitting on a barstool in front of that tomato minding my
> own business while mulling over this problem. I kept asking myself
> whether to sun-dry or not to sun-dry. In the meantrime the sky got
> cloudy and it became nearly noon. It was around then I considered a
> different option and began asking myself whether to slice or not to
> slice. Whether to dry or not to dry seemed less important . I even
> began talking out loud to myself about all this. (As a matter of note
> it slowly became rather clear to me that the tomato did not react at
> all and, indeed, remained remarkably aloof ). The clock struck noon
> and McDonald's arches viividly flashed into my mind - and the rest
> is history. Later I slept very well because, I reasoned, no matter
> what happened that tomato was to be eventually devoured. Furthermore
> slicing and eating was a much more humane process than what would have
> been the long and slow torture of drying and eating. On the downside
> - the vision of that once beautiful tomato returns to haunt me once
> in a while. But what the heck, if it were not for me that tomato could
> just as well have ended up in Famous Dave's Texas Pit BBQ
> Sauce.instead of inside a wonderful plain cheeeseburger at McDonald's.
>
> AlexM
>
>

A true tale of horror I say! Were there no pieces of toast or a dab or 3
of mayo laying readily to hand? With or without the required thick slices
of turkey, the toasted tomato sandwich slathered in mayo or as some
prefer Miracle whip, is the true food of the Gods. Lacking even those
requiremnets the tomato should have met it's end properly... sliced and
eaten with liberal use of salt and pepper.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

It'll be a sunny day in August, when the Moon will shine that night-
Elbonian Folklore

"zxcvbob" > wrote in message
...
> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm going with a simpler explanation. It's like being called on a
>> statement
>> about how the sun works, ignorant people do not realize they are
>> ignorant.
>> This leads to a general smugness often manifested by chiding and
>> nitpicking
>> behavior. Sort of like, if I act smarter, everyone will just assume I
>> am.
>> Yet for all their brilliance, they couldn't look up something through
>> Google
>> if they had to so they demand that you do it for them. And then they
>> reject
>> it as not worthy of their intelligence. Then they point to a misspelled
>> word and claim proof of your lack of credibility.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
> Did anybody else's irony meter just break a needle.


Clever way to try to distract from the fact that you made an ass of yourself
and can't admit it. You cast a rude accusation having no knowledge at all
of what you spoke and now somehow it's all about me.

YOU got it wrong, pal. Not me.

Paul

Steve Wertz wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:37:00 -0700, Alexm wrote:
>
>> The tomato is now gone. I sliced it and on two trips to McDonald's I
>> took a slice with me ( to the drive in). Each time I ordered a plain
>> cheeseburger and dumped the tomato slice on it. Very tasty.
>> The remaining slices were just eaten by themselves. Now I have to
>> get more tomatoes to do the sun dried thing using some of the posted
>> methods but not yours of course. I want something other than a pile
>> of black dust. ( : - ]
>
> That must have been a heartbreaking decision for this prized
> tomato - to sun-dry this one, lone tomato, or to use it on
> McDonalds hamburgers.
>
> How did you sleep?

Awwwwwww don't be mean))))

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:52:53 GMT, "Paul M. Cook" >
wrote:

>
>"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:18:05 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
>>>spell
>>>> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
>>>> reference material to sustantiate.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ummmm is not a word and that last sentence is a question and not properly
>>>punctuted as such.
>>>
>> wrong.
>
>I guess you can't spell substantiate very well, either.
>
you referred to punctuation, not spelling.
>>
>>>> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed
>>>> it
>>>> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
>>>> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve
>>>> some
>>>> sort of fiber.
>>>
>>>Misuse of a comma.
>>>
>> wrong.
>
>No, I am right. The second sentence is awkward because it breaks the
>meaning into 2 thoughts the last being incomplete. You use a comma to
>seperate elements in a series, usually when an element is not critical to
>the meaning being conveyed and not used when the sentence begins with a
>strong clause. And that is what we have here.
>
you could use a comma or not. neither is 'misuse.'

>>>> As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
>>>> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6 plums
>>>> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.
>>>
>>>Misuse of a comma. Improper use of a semicolon.
>>>
>> comma's o.k. first semicolon should be a colon.
>
>No it should be a period. A colon is used after an independent clause that
>precedes a list. And that is not what we have in that sentence.
>
that is a matter of style, not being incorrect.

>>>> -------------
>>>> Standing tall, ready to serve
>>>
>> so, paul, you're one for five. pretty lousy, even for a grammar nazi.
>> but feel free to gig me for incomplete sentences if you feel you must.
>
>You proved a lot, genius - but English proficiency is not on the list. I
>think considering the incredible display of your own ignorance regarding the
>rules of grammar, not to mention capitalization, I will pass on your
>generous offer.
>
>Nice try, though - better luck next time.
>
>Paul
>
i proved that you not the grammarian you think you are. as written
there are no egregious errors except the one. very clever of you to
notice i don't use capitals, though.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:52:53 GMT, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"blake murphy" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 22:18:05 GMT, "Paul M. Cook"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Ummmm; seems to me your credibility is undermined by your inability to
>>>>spell
>>>>> plum. Perhaps your reply would be better accepted if you could cite
>>>>> reference material to sustantiate.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ummmm is not a word and that last sentence is a question and not
>>>>properly
>>>>punctuted as such.
>>>>
>>> wrong.
>>
>>I guess you can't spell substantiate very well, either.
>>
> you referred to punctuation, not spelling.
>>>
>>>>> Not being a rocket scientist, or any kind of scientist, I just assumed
>>>>> it
>>>>> was the fiber in prunes that provides the laxative effect. It seems
>>>>> reasonable, since most recommendations to combat constipation involve
>>>>> some
>>>>> sort of fiber.
>>>>
>>>>Misuse of a comma.
>>>>
>>> wrong.
>>
>>No, I am right. The second sentence is awkward because it breaks the
>>meaning into 2 thoughts the last being incomplete. You use a comma to
>>seperate elements in a series, usually when an element is not critical to
>>the meaning being conveyed and not used when the sentence begins with a
>>strong clause. And that is what we have here.
>>
> you could use a comma or not. neither is 'misuse.'
>
>>>>> As to prunes vs. plums as laxative; a serving of prunes is
>>>>> generally 4-6 while a serving of plums is 1; I imagine eating 4-6
>>>>> plums
>>>>> (even prune plums, which are smaller) might move one as well.
>>>>
>>>>Misuse of a comma. Improper use of a semicolon.
>>>>
>>> comma's o.k. first semicolon should be a colon.
>>
>>No it should be a period. A colon is used after an independent clause
>>that
>>precedes a list. And that is not what we have in that sentence.
>>
> that is a matter of style, not being incorrect.
>

Uh, wromg. It is by definition how a colon is supposed to be used. There
really are rules to this. Try looking it up in Strunk and White's,
"Elements of Style." If you can't manage that, you can Google "proper use
of colon."

>>>>> -------------
>>>>> Standing tall, ready to serve
>>>>
>>> so, paul, you're one for five. pretty lousy, even for a grammar nazi.
>>> but feel free to gig me for incomplete sentences if you feel you must.
>>
>>You proved a lot, genius - but English proficiency is not on the list. I
>>think considering the incredible display of your own ignorance regarding
>>the
>>rules of grammar, not to mention capitalization, I will pass on your
>>generous offer.
>>
>>Nice try, though - better luck next time.
>>
>>Paul
>>
> i proved that you not the grammarian you think you are. as written
> there are no egregious errors except the one. very clever of you to
> notice i don't use capitals, though.


Yeah, they're just optional as you so clearly "proved." Ya gotta[sic]
admire a guy who makes his own reality: lives by his own laws, a cowboy of
the keyboards, a pirate roaming the grammatical seas, a lone Indian brave
armed only with hyphen and apostrophe. You are a true outlaw.

Aside from that it beats me what you've proven other than to say that your
opinion matters as much as well established rules of grammar.

Pray don't tell me you're a teacher. Oh, the horror!

Paul