 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
A disappointing week
Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > || Roger Zoul wrote: > || > ||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > ||||| > ||||| The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to eat > ||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are > ||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to be the > ||||| key to permanent weight loss. > ||||| > ||||| This data has been publicly presented: > ||||| > ||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard > ||| > ||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your data? > || > || If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. It is > || written plainly enough. > > I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that there is no > data. > Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able to wish it away. > || > || Again, the skinny on the 2PD Approach: > || > || http://tinyurl.com/2p7ud > || You remain informed. Such is the work that I am called to do. Servant to the humblest person in the universe, Andrew -- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
|| Roger Zoul wrote: ||| ||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: ||||| Roger Zoul wrote: ||||| |||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: |||||||| |||||||| The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to |||||||| eat |||||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are |||||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to be |||||||| the |||||||| key to permanent weight loss. |||||||| |||||||| This data has been publicly presented: |||||||| |||||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard |||||| |||||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your data? ||||| ||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. It is ||||| written plainly enough. ||| ||| I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that ||| there is no data. ||| || || Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able to || wish || it away. I didn't see any data. You're a PhD right, so you should know what data are. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > || Roger Zoul wrote: > ||| > ||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > ||||| Roger Zoul wrote: > ||||| > |||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > |||||||| > |||||||| The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to > |||||||| eat > |||||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are > |||||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to be > |||||||| the > |||||||| key to permanent weight loss. > |||||||| > |||||||| This data has been publicly presented: > |||||||| > |||||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard > |||||| > |||||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your data? > ||||| > ||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. It is > ||||| written plainly enough. > ||| > ||| I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that > ||| there is no data. > ||| > || > || Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able to > || wish > || it away. > > I didn't see any data. It seems you are blind. > You're a PhD right, so you should know what data > are. I am a PhD, I do know what data are, and I see the data that you refuse to see. Such is the work that I have been called to do. Servant to the humblest person in the universe, Andrew -- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
|| Roger Zoul wrote: ||| ||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: ||||| Roger Zoul wrote: |||||| |||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: |||||||| Roger Zoul wrote: |||||||| ||||||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: ||||||||||| ||||||||||| The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to ||||||||||| eat ||||||||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are ||||||||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to ||||||||||| be the ||||||||||| key to permanent weight loss. ||||||||||| ||||||||||| This data has been publicly presented: ||||||||||| ||||||||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard ||||||||| ||||||||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your ||||||||| data? |||||||| |||||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. |||||||| It is written plainly enough. |||||| |||||| I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that |||||| there is no data. |||||| ||||| ||||| Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able ||||| to wish ||||| it away. ||| ||| I didn't see any data. || || It seems you are blind. || ||| You're a PhD right, so you should know what data ||| are. || || I am a PhD, I do know what data are, and I see the data that you || refuse to see. || There are no data at this site: http://www.heartmdphd.com/twf/acius.pdf and there are none in this post or the one I originally replied to, to which you replied: |||||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. |||||||| It is written plainly enough. So, perhaps I have missed the data. If so, would you please be so kind as to point me to it again so that I can be sure I am not simply missing it? These replies can become convoluted. Thanks. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > || Roger Zoul wrote: > ||| > ||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > ||||| Roger Zoul wrote: > |||||| > |||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > |||||||| Roger Zoul wrote: > |||||||| > ||||||||| Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > ||||||||||| > ||||||||||| The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to > ||||||||||| eat > ||||||||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are > ||||||||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to > ||||||||||| be the > ||||||||||| key to permanent weight loss. > ||||||||||| > ||||||||||| This data has been publicly presented: > ||||||||||| > ||||||||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard > ||||||||| > ||||||||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your > ||||||||| data? > |||||||| > |||||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. > |||||||| It is written plainly enough. > |||||| > |||||| I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that > |||||| there is no data. > |||||| > ||||| > ||||| Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able > ||||| to wish > ||||| it away. > ||| > ||| I didn't see any data. > || > || It seems you are blind. > || > ||| You're a PhD right, so you should know what data > ||| are. > || > || I am a PhD, I do know what data are, and I see the data that you > || refuse to see. > || > > There are no data at this site: > > http://www.heartmdphd.com/twf/acius.pdf This would be a PDF file and not a site. The same data was presented at the meeting described by the PDF file as has been described here and elsewhe http://www.heartmdphd.com/press.asp > and there are none in this post or the one I originally replied to, to which > you replied: > > |||||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. > |||||||| It is written plainly enough. > > So, perhaps I have missed the data. It seems that you have. > If so, would you please be so kind as > to point me to it again so that I can be sure I am not simply missing it? Certainly. Reread the top of this post. > These replies can become convoluted. Such is the habit of the untruthful to obfuscate. > Thanks. You are welcome. All praises belong to my heavenly Father, Whom I love with all my heart, soul, mind, and strength :-) Servant to the humblest person in the universe, Andrew -- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote: ::: ::: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: ::::: Roger Zoul wrote: :::::: :::::: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: :::::::: Roger Zoul wrote: ::::::::: ::::::::: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: ::::::::::: Roger Zoul wrote: ::::::::::: :::::::::::: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: :::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD :::::::::::::: Approach to eat :::::::::::::: less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you :::::::::::::: are eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" :::::::::::::: appears to be the :::::::::::::: key to permanent weight loss. :::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: This data has been publicly presented: :::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: http://tinyurl.com/3pard :::::::::::: :::::::::::: Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your :::::::::::: data? ::::::::::: ::::::::::: If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. ::::::::::: It is written plainly enough. ::::::::: ::::::::: I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude ::::::::: that there is no data. ::::::::: :::::::: :::::::: Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are :::::::: able to wish :::::::: it away. :::::: :::::: I didn't see any data. ::::: ::::: It seems you are blind. ::::: :::::: You're a PhD right, so you should know what data :::::: are. ::::: ::::: I am a PhD, I do know what data are, and I see the data that you ::::: refuse to see. ::::: ::: ::: There are no data at this site: ::: ::: http://www.heartmdphd.com/twf/acius.pdf :: :: This would be a PDF file and not a site. The same data was :: presented at the meeting described by the PDF file as has been :: described here and elsewhe I asked for data not descriptions of data. You said there was data on the site but now you're saying that the data has only be described. :: :: http://www.heartmdphd.com/press.asp :: ::: and there are none in this post or the one I originally replied to, ::: to which you replied: ::: ::::::::::: If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. ::::::::::: It is written plainly enough. ::: ::: So, perhaps I have missed the data. :: :: It seems that you have. No, I have not. This statement is not data: :::::::::::::: The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD :::::::::::::: Approach to eat :::::::::::::: less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you :::::::::::::: are eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" :::::::::::::: appears to be the :::::::::::::: key to permanent weight loss. :: ::: If so, would you please be so kind as ::: to point me to it again so that I can be sure I am not simply ::: missing it? :: :: Certainly. Reread the top of this post. Yeah. :: ::: These replies can become convoluted. :: :: Such is the habit of the untruthful to obfuscate. :: Exactly. ::: Thanks. :: :: You are welcome. :: :: All praises belong to my heavenly Father, Whom I love with all my :: heart, soul, mind, and strength :-) :: :: :: Servant to the humblest person in the universe, :: :: Andrew :: :: -- :: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD :: Board-Certified Cardiologist :: http://www.heartmdphd.com/ :: :: ** :: Who is the humblest person in the universe? :: http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 :: :: What is all this about? :: http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 :: :: Is this spam? :: http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
The below is the answer to a longer exchange:
> Just because you do not like the data does not mean you are able > ||||| to wish > ||||| it away. "Data" becomes what he forces it by definition to be. The data is in it's entirety the word "everyone". I put the above first to show how when in a corner Chung will try a rhetorical language trick, he injects his personality into the discussion. In particular, his reaction to any thing that speaks of judgement about him, in this case the quality of the "research" and how it reflects very badly upon him and the image he wants to project about himself. His personality has nothing to do with the absense, save the "word", of the fact that data as used and at the level of quality used in valid scienctific research is not there. Worst, his "experiement" fails just about every principle of valid research in bio 101 class. Here is the longer exchange on which the above is based: > The data is simple: *Everyone* who uses the 2PD Approach to > ||||||||||| eat > ||||||||||| less loses weight. The shift from "watching *what* you are > ||||||||||| eating" to "watching *how much* you are eating" appears to > ||||||||||| be the > ||||||||||| key to permanent weight loss. > ||||||||||| > ||||||||||| This data has been publicly presented: > ||||||||||| > ||||||||||| http://tinyurl.com/3pard > ||||||||| > ||||||||| Why not post your slides on your website so we can see your > ||||||||| data? > |||||||| > |||||||| If you have read the above, you have already seen the data. > |||||||| It is written plainly enough. > |||||| > |||||| I read the link above and the text above. Thus, I conclude that > |||||| there is no data. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is what causes folk to wonder when the "mr. hyde" shows up to attempt a save of the "dr. jeckle" side of the daring duo. It is lousy science. It would never be accepted for publication in any even simi peer reviewed science publication. >This is exactly what I am talking about when you deal with folks who do not >have a research background yet want to argue about data. it's worthless and >a waste of time. > >Zoul wants "data". Roger, data is nothing more than information and it can, >or cannot, be tied to research. If it is tied to research, you're out of >your league trying to interpolate it. What Andrew has provided is data in >the term of info. He, as I am, are well aware of whether it is research >oriented or not. He, not I, *can* investigate research, research >methodologies, citations and the like. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>::: http://www.heartmdphd.com/twf/acius.pdf >:: >:: This would be a PDF file and not a site. The same data was >:: presented at the meeting described by the PDF file as has been >:: described here and elsewhe On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:29:12 -0500, Roger Zoul wrote: > I asked for data not descriptions of data. You said there was data on the > site but now you're saying that the data has only be described. This is exactly what I am talking about when you deal with folks who do not have a research background yet want to argue about data. it's worthless and a waste of time. Zoul wants "data". Roger, data is nothing more than information and it can, or cannot, be tied to research. If it is tied to research, you're out of your league trying to interpolate it. What Andrew has provided is data in the term of info. He, as I am, are well aware of whether it is research oriented or not. He, not I, *can* investigate research, research methodologies, citations and the like. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
It ain't the data, it is the pretention of science and the plea for
relevance and recognition that is a problem. If one is reduced to word play to maintain image, well, pride comes before fall. If one accepts that level of quality of "data", then every quack with snake oil has all the data you ask him to produce. What would friends at emory have to say about the quality of this "data"? "Sorry you don't like the data either (shrug)." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> wrote: >> "Data" becomes what he forces it by definition to be. On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:06:04 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: > Sorry you don't like the data either (shrug). What he and Zoul don't like is that it does not meet their definition of data. Fine. If it was research, they couldn't rightly comprehend it anyway. This puts their agenda, which has nothing to do with research data (since it is would be info in the hands of babes) true to the light. They want something that they cannot use for any real purpose so they argue to get it. Duh. The agenda is to try to find some battlefield that they can stand against the 2PDiet, and its successes, so they do this with "give us what we have no clue about" "logic". It's funny, ridiculous and humorous to watch. As they head, fast as possible, into a dead end argument. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Top posting issues aside, you have no idea what it takes to make "good
science" or "to be accepted for publication in any even simi peer reviewed science publication". Sentence structure alone pegs you as college challenged much less doctorate qualified. No doctorate? No qualifications. =============================================== On 06 Dec 2004 19:50:49 GMT, wrote: > This is what causes folk to wonder when the "mr. hyde" shows up to attempt > a save of the "dr. jeckle" side of the daring duo. It is lousy science. > It would never be accepted for publication in any even simi peer reviewed > science publication. > >>This is exactly what I am talking about when you deal with folks who do not >>have a research background yet want to argue about data. it's worthless and >>a waste of time. >> >>Zoul wants "data". Roger, data is nothing more than information and it can, >>or cannot, be tied to research. If it is tied to research, you're out of >>your league trying to interpolate it. What Andrew has provided is data in >>the term of info. He, as I am, are well aware of whether it is research >>oriented or not. He, not I, *can* investigate research, research >>methodologies, citations and the like. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ah, hit upon a nerve. You have no knowledge at all of my suite of letters
to drape before and after my name. Most phd folk I have known show no indication of such, it is in fact a cause for some distain from them when seeing folk who have little but the alphebet to show for their efforts. This is an example of the most childish display of hissy fit to consider. Andrew does a bit of observation, thinks he sees a pattern, and calls it science. Mr. hyde to the battle changes that not a whit. Because the "pattern" is in it's weakist form by narrow definition of "data" serves only to reflect upon him very very badly in several aspects that leads one to pity after seeing that laughter is misplaced. "Top posting issues aside, you have no idea what it takes to make "good science" or "to be accepted for publication in any even simi peer reviewed science publication". Sentence structure alone pegs you as college challenged much less doctorate qualified. No doctorate? No qualifications." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Correct. The definition of data is not static is is up to the supplier
*and* the reader to determine if it meets their criteria." And thus is the whine of every quack selling snake oil, "I am an authority only to myself and those who believe me". Every one I gave my wonderful potion was cured of aids. Now we have both data and science. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
> > It ain't the data, it is the pretention of science and the plea for > relevance and recognition that is a problem. You're going to have to make up your minds. Roger Zoul claims he does not see any data in his attempt to wish the data away. You now claim that your problem is not with the data but with the motive behind the data gathering. Perhaps you both can come back to this discussion when you have reached a consensus to present a stronger unified front in your futile attempt to overcome the truth. Meanwhile, I stand ready to document the first person to gain weight despite eating less per the 2PD Approach but in truth, no one should be expecting this any more than one would expect cars to be replaced by perpetual motion machines. It still amazes me how there are folks (i.e. Roger Zoul and "wondering") who seem to believe that they can gain weight despite eating less (i.e. create mass/bulk out of thin air) and yet they seem unable to believe our Creator, our heavenly Father, can do exactly that (i.e. create mass/bulk out of thin air). This again illustrates how undiscerning people will choose to believe what they want to believe even if it is far removed from the truth. Servant to the humblest person in the universe, Andrew -- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have made up my mind, your childish attempt to save face is the cause of pity for you. You know well how trivial the tiny point is that you have gone to great lenghts to try to salvage. If i see a group of people jump off a bridge then everyone jumped and the data supports the observation that all jumped. I have data and a description of what happened; walla I have science. As for the diet. any constraint made on calorie intake below what is needed to maintain metabolisim etc. will result in weight loss. One can use weight of food as the constraint, one can use total volume such as x cups per day of food, one can use time to consume such as x number of minutes to eat; the list can be quite long in fact. That is the height and breath and content of your diet and "everyone" - there's that data again - who gives it a look sees that. Your whole foot stamping below about what I have said about your diet is putting words in my mouth and this is a form of false witness. I'm sorry for you for the blindsiding life gave you and I do understand why maintaining face and supporting trivial points of word play now seem inportant to you. It's time for you to move on and accept your limitations. One obvious place to start is a bit of humility and dropping the mask of "authority" you crave to cause others to see in you. When you are ready to be a real man, then the information you know can then be put to some good use, and the light of God will really ahve some chance to shine through you. >You're going to have to make up your minds. Roger Zoul claims he does >not see any data in his attempt to wish the data away. You now claim >that your problem is not with the data but with the motive behind the >data gathering. > >Perhaps you both can come back to this discussion when you have reached >a consensus to present a stronger unified front in your futile attempt >to overcome the truth. > >Meanwhile, I stand ready to document the first person to gain weight >despite eating less per the 2PD Approach but in truth, no one should be >expecting this any more than one would expect cars to be replaced by >perpetual motion machines. > >It still amazes me how there are folks (i.e. Roger Zoul and "wondering") >who seem to believe that they can gain weight despite eating less (i.e. >create mass/bulk out of thin air) and yet they seem unable to believe >our Creator, our heavenly Father, can do exactly that (i.e. create >mass/bulk out of thin air). This again illustrates how undiscerning >people will choose to believe what they want to believe even if it is >far removed from the truth. > > >Servant to the humblest person in the universe, > >Andrew > >-- >Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD >Board-Certified Cardiologist >http://www.heartmdphd.com/ > >** >Who is the humblest person in the universe? >http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 > >What is all this about? >http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 > >Is this spam? >http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 07 Dec 2004 00:48:45 GMT, wrote:
> And thus is the whine of every quack selling snake oil...... Well Hi there, Dougie, so nice to hear from you again. You don't mind me calling you by your real name, do you? Best close off those ports, Dougie. reader.city-net.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.144.32.8 X-Trace: 1100215750 reader.city-net.com 63176 198.144.32.8 The account details a "Davidson, G. Douglas" > Davidson, G. Douglas CityNet, Inc. 1739 East Carson Street, Number 352 Pittsburgh, PA 15203 USA Telephone - 412-481-5406 Email - |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Your top posting issues aside, most phd folk I have known demonstrate much
higher levels of conversational ability. I am sorry if you feel my "distain" for your lies regarding your (lack of) educational qualifications fully demonstrated by the simple fact you can't spell. Maybe you use a different "alphebet" I bet. Maybe your nonsensical thought structure makes you the "weakist" link. I'm alphebetting you are a moron. On 07 Dec 2004 00:44:52 GMT, wrote: > You have no knowledge at all of my suite of letters > to drape before and after my name. Most phd folk I have known show no > indication of such, it is in fact a cause for some distain from them when > seeing folk who have little but the alphebet to show for their efforts. > This is an example of the most childish display of hissy fit to consider. > Andrew does a bit of observation, thinks he sees a pattern, and calls it > science. Mr. hyde to the battle changes that not a whit. Because the > "pattern" is in it's weakist form by narrow definition of "data" serves > only to reflect upon him very very badly in several aspects that leads one > to pity after seeing that laughter is misplaced. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
I tend to edit and proof read in direct proportion to the respect accorded the person to whom I 'm responding, it it's a matter of a waste of time ya know. I participate in an academic malinglist where almost all participants are faculty with degrees up the gazoo and with many years of research experience. Not one of them adds, either fore or aft, any of the alphabet to their names. It is in one sense a matter of poor taste and to do so would suggest that a poster needed it to punch up their standing in some way and/or lacked something in their image of self or in possible judgement from others. Andrew did a trivial observation trial and error thing and made a big point of it as though serious research. The latter is judged by concensus of what it is in the scientific community and not his forced self definition of same. All the letters he wants to use, and never fails to do so in absurdum, does not rescyue him from this reality but does speak much of his current state. A s said, a more proper reason for pity then humor upon reflection. It is clear he counts dearly upon readers in newsgroups not knowing the difference, sorry to bring reality into the discussion. >Your top posting issues aside, most phd folk I have known demonstrate much >higher levels of conversational ability. > >I am sorry if you feel my "distain" for your lies regarding your (lack of) >educational qualifications fully demonstrated by the simple fact you can't >spell. Maybe you use a different "alphebet" I bet. Maybe your nonsensical >thought structure makes you the "weakist" link. > >I'm alphebetting you are a moron. > >On 07 Dec 2004 00:44:52 GMT, wrote: > >> You have no knowledge at all of my suite of letters >> to drape before and after my name. Most phd folk I have known show no >> indication of such, it is in fact a cause for some distain from them when >> seeing folk who have little but the alphebet to show for their efforts. >> This is an example of the most childish display of hissy fit to consider. >> Andrew does a bit of observation, thinks he sees a pattern, and calls it >> science. Mr. hyde to the battle changes that not a whit. Because the >> "pattern" is in it's weakist form by narrow definition of "data" serves >> only to reflect upon him very very badly in several aspects that leads one >> to pity after seeing that laughter is misplaced. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is there a better example of pot calling kettle black then could be found. Good to see you have learned about web resources to find poosting sources. Of course you hide behind mutiple names and a third party newsgroup service to obscure your posting origin. In which case mr. hyde, of the daring duo dr. jeckle and mr. hyde, will serve no doubt. The dr. half of the duo also uses such tactics to obscure his posting origins. That is part of what those services sell. Call me as you wish, if "everyone" cares, now that is data ya know. >Well Hi there, Dougie, so nice to hear from you again. You don't mind me >calling you by your real name, do you? > >Best close off those ports, Dougie. > >reader.city-net.com >NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.144.32.8 >X-Trace: 1100215750 reader.city-net.com 63176 198.144.32.8 > >The account details a > >"Davidson, G. Douglas" > >Davidson, G. Douglas >CityNet, Inc. >1739 East Carson Street, Number 352 >Pittsburgh, PA 15203 >USA > >Telephone - 412-481-5406 >Email - |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"I tend to respond to people who lie about their educational background,"
However you choose your friends is your concern. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
MU wrote:
> On 07 Dec 2004 00:48:45 GMT, wrote: > >>And thus is the whine of every quack selling snake oil...... > > Well Hi there, Dougie, so nice to hear from you again. You don't mind me > calling you by your real name, do you? > > Best close off those ports, Dougie. You scurrilous prick. You hypocritical fraud. You say that it's just usenet - playtime - and shouldn't be taken seriously then you set about to deliberately cause harm in real life. You are utterly immoral, dishonorable and without scruples. As much a frivolous "Christian" as Chung who has done the same sorts of things. You are both too contemptible to describe, with malice towards all... Your corruption would gag a rat... Bob > reader.city-net.com > NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.144.32.8 > X-Trace: 1100215750 reader.city-net.com 63176 198.144.32.8 > > The account details a > |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Disappointing wine weekend, but anyway nice week with Austrian wines. | Wine | |||
| dinner this week, next week, and the week after that with recipe | General Cooking | |||
| TN: disappointing Bachelet | Wine | |||
| disappointing cherry pie | General Cooking | |||
| A disappointing week--Servant to----? | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
