What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?

:-)))))))))))))))))))))

_________

Peter Lucas
in Brisbane
Australia

On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>
> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>
> _________
>
> Peter Lucas
> in Brisbane
> Australia

Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say under
any circumstance.

plonk.

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:
> On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
>> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
>> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>>
>> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>>
>> _________
>>
>> Peter Lucas
>> in Brisbane
>> Australia
>
> Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say under
> any circumstance.
>
> plonk.
>
> Bob
Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?

On 6/1/2010 7:30 PM, atec7 7 > wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>> On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
>>> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
>>> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>>>
>>> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>>>
>>> _________
>>>
>>> Peter Lucas
>>> in Brisbane
>>> Australia
>>
>> Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say
>> under any circumstance.
>>
>> plonk.
>>
>> Bob
> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?

Thanks atec for the gut check. I've been gone for a while. But I
remember you as being a good person.

PL - Sorry for the not nice reference. I did kf the other.

My bad.

Sorry for being rude.

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:
> On 6/1/2010 7:30 PM, atec7 7 > wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
>>>> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
>>>> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>>>>
>>>> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>>>>
>>>> _________
>>>>
>>>> Peter Lucas
>>>> in Brisbane
>>>> Australia
>>>
>>> Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say
>>> under any circumstance.
>>>
>>> plonk.
>>>
>>> Bob
>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>
> Thanks atec for the gut check. I've been gone for a while. But I
> remember you as being a good person.
>
> PL - Sorry for the not nice reference. I did kf the other.
>
> My bad.
>
> Sorry for being rude.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
Are you mildly retarded or is it worse than that?

On 6/1/2010 8:51 PM, Larry wrote:
> Bob Muncie wrote:
>> On 6/1/2010 7:30 PM, atec7 7 > wrote:
>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>> On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
>>>>> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
>>>>> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>>>>>
>>>>> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>>>>>
>>>>> _________
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Lucas
>>>>> in Brisbane
>>>>> Australia
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say
>>>> under any circumstance.
>>>>
>>>> plonk.
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
>>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>>
>> Thanks atec for the gut check. I've been gone for a while. But I
>> remember you as being a good person.
>>
>> PL - Sorry for the not nice reference. I did kf the other.
>>
>> My bad.
>>
>> Sorry for being rude.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>
> Are you mildly retarded or is it worse than that?

I thought I already Kf'd you... sorry for having not done so.

And BTW, you are a twit/****.

Bob

Sorry for the over spill into the UK and AS groups.

But I'm guessing that the same twit is in your space.

Bob Muncie wrote:
> On 6/1/2010 8:51 PM, Larry wrote:
>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>> On 6/1/2010 7:30 PM, atec7 7 > wrote:
>>>> Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>>> On 6/1/2010 4:54 PM, Peter Lucas wrote:
>>>>>> What did one pedofile sperm say to the other?
>>>>>> How are we ever gonna find an egg in all this shit?!?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> :-)))))))))))))))))))))
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter Lucas
>>>>>> in Brisbane
>>>>>> Australia
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for reminding me why I never want to read anything you say
>>>>> under any circumstance.
>>>>>
>>>>> plonk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter
>>>> which you
>>>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>>>
>>> Thanks atec for the gut check. I've been gone for a while. But I
>>> remember you as being a good person.
>>>
>>> PL - Sorry for the not nice reference. I did kf the other.
>>>
>>> My bad.
>>>
>>> Sorry for being rude.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Are you mildly retarded or is it worse than that?
>
> I thought I already Kf'd you... sorry for having not done so.
>
> And BTW, you are a twit/****.
>
> Bob
>
> Sorry for the over spill into the UK and AS groups.
>
> But I'm guessing that the same twit is in your space.
You didn't answer the question.

On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:30:16 +1000, atec7 7 wrote:

> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?

Even the normal Peter (when not in one of his fugue states of
being as Peter Stalker), is proven not worth reading. He's a
pompous, self-centered, egotistical, narcissistic asshole.

When he posts as his stalkers, he's actually normal in comparison.
That why he invented his own stalkers.

-sw

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:04:33 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:30:16 +1000, atec7 7 wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>
> Even the normal Peter (when not in one of his fugue states of
> being as Peter Stalker), is proven not worth reading. He's a
> pompous, self-centered, egotistical, narcissistic asshole.
>
> When he posts as his stalkers, he's actually normal in comparison.
> That why he invented his own stalkers.
>
> -sw

i can't go along with your theory that he is his own stalker. that would
be mildly interesting, an attribute that neither he nor his stalkers
possess.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:52:46 -0400, blake murphy wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:04:33 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:30:16 +1000, atec7 7 wrote:
>>
>>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
>>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>>
>> Even the normal Peter (when not in one of his fugue states of
>> being as Peter Stalker), is proven not worth reading. He's a
>> pompous, self-centered, egotistical, narcissistic asshole.
>>
>> When he posts as his stalkers, he's actually normal in comparison.
>> That why he invented his own stalkers.
>
> i can't go along with your theory that he is his own stalker. that would
> be mildly interesting, an attribute that neither he nor his stalkers
> possess.

Gravity, relativity, evolution, and Everything are still
technically theories as well. Even though they have been proven
beyond a reasonable doubt and have never been disproven. At what
point does a theory become a fact?

-sw

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:01:30 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 13:52:46 -0400, blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 21:04:33 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:30:16 +1000, atec7 7 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wouldn't you find more satisfaction in blocking the fake peter which you
>>>> can do by looking at headers instead of looking uninformed ?
>>>
>>> Even the normal Peter (when not in one of his fugue states of
>>> being as Peter Stalker), is proven not worth reading. He's a
>>> pompous, self-centered, egotistical, narcissistic asshole.
>>>
>>> When he posts as his stalkers, he's actually normal in comparison.
>>> That why he invented his own stalkers.
>>
>> i can't go along with your theory that he is his own stalker. that would
>> be mildly interesting, an attribute that neither he nor his stalkers
>> possess.
>
> Gravity, relativity, evolution, and Everything are still
> technically theories as well. Even though they have been proven
> beyond a reasonable doubt and have never been disproven. At what
> point does a theory become a fact?
>
> -sw

don't know about fact, but a theory's only useful if you can use it to
predict things. though i guess you can predict peter and his (own?)
stalkers will be inane (and predictable).

your pal,
blake