On Oct 14, 9:23 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 14, 4:28 pm, wrote:

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.

William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)

Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?

Now that's a weird contribution, Rabbi Mook. What part of MI5/NSA did
you say you worked for?
- Brad Guth -

Do you really expect an honest answer to that question? If not why
ask it? The fact is Brad, I work for myself and others work for me.
I'm just trying to help you see things a little differently from the
boneheaded approach you've been following since day one. You may
recall I have been nothing but consistent. I have asked you to stop
posting, failing that to stop posting to areas I post to, failing that
to be nice, failing that to temper your responses. I don't know that
this has any impact, you can be assured I will continue giving you
these consistent clear messages to shut the **** up and get out of my
damn life - until you understand. haha..

I was responding to Jim where he lives emotionally. He wanted to
imply so badly I was paranoid he forgot what it would cost him - the
possibility that you might be more temperate in your responses. Ah
well.

I will say my ex-wife got her PhD in education and she worked on using
computers to guage response latency of learners. Very interesting
topic. One interesting application was in lie-detection. If you
asked a question such as does a bird have wings a person replies yes.
does a bird have feathers yes. does a bird have skin - a pause - yes.

Now, do this enough times and you can construct a latency map between
concepts. Birds and feathers, birds and wings, are closely allied.
Bird and skin is not. In fact you can after a series of interactions
determine that there is another subject a subject not discussed at all
between bird and skin - call it animal - that you didn't talk about at
all.

Another interesting fact is that you can figure out whether or not
this item is there no matter how they answered the specific
questions!!

In a learning situation you can use this information to direct
teaching software very accurately to the needs of a learner.

In a spy situation you can use this information to figure out what two
people think about an subject neither talked about even if they were
lying through their teeth to one another.

Now, my EX- *did* get a DOD grant for her research, and they took
certain aspects of it and developed it further, but she couldn't tell
me about it.

The office of naval research I think was involved - but they may not
exist any more in the form that funded her stuff. This was back in
the day we were both young and foolish and in grad school together.
she was hot and so was i - haha..