A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #311  
Old February 22nd 06, 04:42 PM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!


"Dr. Why" wrote in message
...
"Honest John" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Why" wrote in message
...
"Honest John" wrote in message
et...

"Kali" wrote in message
...
In article , posted
Sun, 19 Feb 2006 07:21:28 -0900, Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
says...

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:33:15 -0600, Kali wrote in
alt.fan.art-bell in message
:

In article , posted Sat,
18 Feb 2006 15:30:36 -0700, Art Deco says...

Charles D. Bohne wrote:

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 21:43:52 GMT, "Greysky"

wrote:

I applaud your fearlessness in accepting that it would be
good to make FOC even if the death rate exceeds 12% by a

large
margin. It
puts you and a few others in the Sean Minority, but you

stick
to
your guns.

Greysky

Seconded by
Charles

:-Y

The saucerheads are high-fiving each other again.


I note Chuck gave the signal for f0rked tongue slurpage.

Kali

It's so he can slurp GaySky's balls and anus at the same time.

The
Swiss are notoriously for their efficiency.
--
V.G.

Ut oh, I just gave Mr. Deco "the signal" *giggle*

If Art was proven to be in the 12%, would you "aliens" go ahead with

FOC
?

HJ



This is an unliklihood, HJ, because Art is one of the least fearful

humans
we know.


________________________________________________
How do you figure that, he got so exited about me discussing theology on
another thread that he came over there personally to inform me that I

hurt
the tender feelings of one of his croneys and nominated me for some

crap.
Further, I think that he ****ed his pants.
________________________________________________


LOL, you must be speaking from a position of strength to say that. G




EVIL IS POWERLESS IF THE GOOD ARE UNAFRAID - Ronald Reagan














Also, there is no way of telling who will be snap crackle popping when

they
find out about FOC.
If there were such a way of telling, we would be able to contain at

least
some of the carnage.

To answer your question, IF Art were more fearfully prone to be in the

12%,
and IF there were a way to predict this, and IF Art were proven to be

in
the
12%, then yes.


__________________________________________

I knew that you had human qualities.

__________________________________________


Heaven knows we do try.




When the PSR reaches 12%, and other important factors also meet our
standards, we will initiate FOC.
We don't get to "pick the vics".

Y

PS: I see you don't consider a *giggle* as profoundly idiotic as a

hee
hee .
Are you improving? or merely sucking up! G


___________________________________________

Probably sucking up since I ****ed off the "invisible power structure"
here.


HJ
___________________________________________



TINC

Dr. Y




  #312  
Old February 22nd 06, 06:08 PM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Here Come de Armada !!! G


"Charles D. Bohne" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:20:10 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

And on that note, Charles, it is time to bid you adieu.
Our human study here in alt.astronomy is coming to a close.
We have disrupted the group long enough, now, and it's time to move on.

I already have answered that as a response to your post for HJ.

Maybe you could leave us "some hope" ;-


How about this ---

"We gonna make like the mother ship and get the arm ahda here!"

G

Hope's okay, Charles, but fearlessness is So much better.

Happiness & Prosperity to you and all your loved ones ---

Y.


  #313  
Old February 22nd 06, 09:31 PM posted to alt.astronomy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Here Come de Armada !!! G

Darla Spring is just around the corner. If you invite us aboard I
will bake MSP pies for everyone. We miss you. Your virtiual friend
TreBert

  #314  
Old February 23rd 06, 06:35 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Here Come de Armada !!! G

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 17:08:38 GMT, "Darla"
wrote:


"Charles D. Bohne" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:20:10 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

And on that note, Charles, it is time to bid you adieu.
Our human study here in alt.astronomy is coming to a close.
We have disrupted the group long enough, now, and it's time to move on.

I already have answered that as a response to your post for HJ.

Maybe you could leave us "some hope" ;-


How about this ---

"We gonna make like the mother ship and get the arm ahda here!"

G

Hope's okay, Charles, but fearlessness is So much better.


How does it feel to be utterly lacking in courage, "Darla"?


Happiness & Prosperity to you and all your loved ones ---


ESL!

--
Bookman -The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in AFA-B
Kazoo Konspirator #668 (The Neighbor of the Beast)
Clue-Bat Wrangler
Keeper of the Nickname Lists
Despotic Kookologist of the New World Order
Monthly Hammer of Thor award, October 2005
"I'd love to kill you in a ring" - Bartmo gets all touchy-feely
"****SPV....... So yes I am an idiot."
"ASK THE NWS, YOUR TAX DOLLAR GOES TO THEM NOT TO DR.TURI."
- Mr. Turi explains how to accurately predict hurricanes
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/afa-b/
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/afa-b/index.html
  #315  
Old February 23rd 06, 07:10 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:27:16 GMT, "Darla"
wrote:

Dr. Yubiwan, for Darla ---

"Bookman" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:03:59 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .

And the difference is? Just leave the infant out and tell me
what you think the mouse does. The rats I've worked with, when
they are put in water over several trials, generally behave the
same way; they swim and swim and swim until you take them out.
If we left them in, I imagine they'd become exhausted and drown
after a while.
Dr. Why

Kali



It's obvious to me that you've been playin' wif me.
If you are indeed into neuroscience, which I doubt, then it must be at

the
most rudimentary level.
No matter, Kali, because things have changed.


Kali hace achieved much SPNAK!


SO true!


Yep, she Spnaked you good. Did you enjoy it?




I was just speaking with Darla, and she reminded me of one of our
directives.
If humans already have evidence for something, and they are presently

just
misinterpreting the evidence, then we can only guide you.
We cannot "silver platter" it for you.


Evasion noted.


Couldn't be helped, BM.
Your initials? BM?
How unfortunate! G


Incorrect, since I am not Book Man, but rather "Bookman". The "BM" is
only is your head, as is obvius to the casual observer.



In the case of the mouse, the first time in the water and the mouse gives
up, feels helpless, long, long before it becomes exhausted.


Evidence?


DYOHW


It isn't my "HW". You made the k'lame, you do _your_ homework to back
it up. Otherwise your k'lame is known far and wide to be untrue.



But you take the mouse out, then put it back in the water, and it won't

stop
trying to escape until it becomes completely and totally exhausted.
Because the second time it knows something it did not know the first

time:
there just might be a chance, however tiny, to escape.
If you were truly into neuroscience, you would have known about this long
tried and true experiment.
It's a classic.


This relates to "fear" how"? Oh, that's right - it's an assertion
without evidence. How typical of a fake "alien".


No, it's Not an assertion w/o evidence, Bookman.


Yes, it is. You provided no evidence, just asserted your k'lame.

It's an assertion w/o REFERENCE.


Whate "reference"? Oh, that's right, you didn't DYOFHW, so there was
no reference.

There is ample evidence in your own science journals for the unlazy person
to discover when ready.


DYHW, then.


How typical of a fake "bookman". (juuuust kidding)


Suuure.




As for the fearless gene, you already have the platter and it's not

silver.
The evidence is there before you easily found and just as easily
misinterpreted.
Your science found this evidence without any help, but has not yet

realized
its significance.


Evasion noted.


Misinterpretation noted.


Lack of evidence is indeed an evasion, and as such was interpreted
correctly. Further evasion noted.




When it comes to fear, you're just going to have to go back and begin at

the
beginning.
And stop judging observations and experimental results through a veil of
fear.
This is the greatest human barrier of all.


Still evading.


PKB


Darla, you are hereby advised not to misuse terminology which you
clearly do not comprehend.




On a brighter note, we will be out of your hair soon.
Our study of individual human behaviour has reached another milestone,

and
it is time to move on.
We will be ending our presence in alt.astronomy soon.
I will try to talk to as many as possible individually, and also to post

a
goodbye message.


And another "goodbye forever" k'lame.


Never say forever.


Of course not - you never mean it, after all.




Darla and Pom will return in the Spring hopefully to initiate official
global contact.


Yeah, right.


That's the spirit! G
Good, healthy skepticism is OK.


And Darla may want to post a few thoughts at that time.


Talkig about yourself in the third person is primary ko0ksign,
"Darla".


Where would you Be without those neat koOksigns?
(Personally, I think the capital "oh" sukeys better than the zero, ymmv)


Since there is never a lack of ko0ks to provide them, the question
isn't relevant. HTH.




So goodbye, Kali, and whether or not you're truly into neuroscience, I do
still consider you to be one of the smartest people I've met.


You should, considering how she humiliated you.


redfaced
I AM SO CONFUSED!!!!


No surprise, really.



(Well, you DID take notice of my "extraordinary talent", didn't you? G)


Yeah, you are extraordinarily talented at ko0king out.

Note: Kali's evidence that infants are inherently afraid of "visual
cliffs" have been completely avoided.

I DECLARE KALI HACE ACHEIVED MUCH SPNAKNESS!1!

ESL!


aS iF aNYbODY gIVES a dURN, boOkman.


Get back to us[tinu] when you have mastered "caps lock" tech, OK?


I am SO sorry I failed to include your name personally on the thankyou list,
Bookman!


When will you be publishing your next lits?

There were some brief but interesting discussions, I remember.
If you'll forgive me for this humongous oversight, I promise to show you
some interesting books we


Who is the "we" you refer to, fakxored ayleeun? Voices in your head,
p'raps?

have rescued from library fires over the years.
Lost but not forgotten.


And a false promise to close, how typical.

ESL!

--
Bookman -The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in AFA-B
Kazoo Konspirator #668 (The Neighbor of the Beast)
Clue-Bat Wrangler
Keeper of the Nickname Lists
Despotic Kookologist of the New World Order
Monthly Hammer of Thor award, October 2005
"I'd love to kill you in a ring" - Bartmo gets all touchy-feely
"****SPV....... So yes I am an idiot."
"ASK THE NWS, YOUR TAX DOLLAR GOES TO THEM NOT TO DR.TURI."
- Mr. Turi explains how to accurately predict hurricanes
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/afa-b/
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/afa-b/index.html
  #316  
Old February 23rd 06, 07:26 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

In article z1UKf.441837$qk4.430985@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:03:59
GMT, Dr. Why says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article _L6Kf.428442$qk4.333241@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 23:00:10
GMT, Dr. Why
says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article Wm3Kf.41820$id5.19657@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:08:38
GMT, Dr. Why
says...

[...]

Please be more specific, Kali.
I have read all the websites and found nothing to indicate that I'm
believed
to be incorrect.
Perhaps I missed something?

Please provide evidence for your claim that "humans are
...genetically fearless human beings".

Okay, I shall provide evidence, but please be patient now as I have other
duties that must come first.


Take your time.

I've provided references to a body of evidence that contradicts
your claim. Look up "visual cliff" experiments with 6 month old
infants, in which they fear a perceived drop-off. They didn't
learn to feel the fear, it is innate. In other words, we are
hard wired to experience fear. It is important to our survival.
If you say that we are genetically fearless, then you'll need to
back up your statement with sound reasoning about evidence.


[...]

As usual, you and others are mistaking fear for something else.
Assume for the moment that I'm correct, please, Kali.
If they indeed are noting fear in these 6-mo. old infants incorrectly,

what
else could it be?

Would you like a hint?


Actually, something straightforward would be nice for a change.
But okay.

Drop a live mouse in a deep tub of water.
It scrambles in an attempt to escape drowning, and it eventually gives

up.
As you may say, though not yet dead, it has resigned itself to its fate.


Exhaustion is resignation to one's fate?

If you provided an example of a field mouse being chased by a
cat, who "plays dead", you might have something interesting.
Animals of prey will do this. Do *you* know why? Want a hint?

Now you reach in and save the mouse, let it run around a bit, then toss

it
back in the tub.
What is the difference in the way the mouse behaves from its first

attempt
to escape the tub?


You tell me.

Figure out why the mouse gave up the first time, and you will know what

the
infants are really feeling.


Exhaustion? Helplessness? What does this have to do with infants
who will instinctively avoid a visual cliff?

Don't believe me?


Actually, I'm having trouble understanding how you are putting
things together. There is an assumption that you seem to have
made about a 2nd trial stressed rat that I wouldn't make, and
then you suggest it has something to do with infants in the
visual cliff experiment. And I really, really don't know how any
of this suggests that "humans are genetically programmed to be
fearless."

Conduct the infant experiment yourself, but this time, after "saving" the
infant, subject the infant once more to the visual cliff.
You will note the same difference in behavior that you noted in the

mouse.

And the difference is? Just leave the infant out and tell me
what you think the mouse does. The rats I've worked with, when
they are put in water over several trials, generally behave the
same way; they swim and swim and swim until you take them out.
If we left them in, I imagine they'd become exhausted and drown
after a while.
Dr. Why


Kali
--
A bore is simply a nonentity who resents his humble lot in life,
and seeks satisfaction for his wounded ego by forcing himself on
his betters. - H. L. Mencken


It's obvious to me that you've been playin' wif me.


We'll see who's been playin'...

If you are indeed into neuroscience, which I doubt, then it must be at the
most rudimentary level.
No matter, Kali, because things have changed.

I was just speaking with Darla, and she reminded me of one of our
directives.
If humans already have evidence for something, and they are presently just
misinterpreting the evidence, then we can only guide you.
We cannot "silver platter" it for you.


Darla, this is B.S. You know it. I know it. Let's stay in the
real world just a little while longer before you trot off into a
coma with a Virgo

In the case of the mouse, the first time in the water and the mouse gives
up, feels helpless, long, long before it becomes exhausted.
But you take the mouse out, then put it back in the water, and it won't stop
trying to escape until it becomes completely and totally exhausted.
Because the second time it knows something it did not know the first time:
there just might be a chance, however tiny, to escape.
If you were truly into neuroscience, you would have known about this long
tried and true experiment.
It's a classic.


"If you were truly into neuroscience..."

I think the problem here is in how we each define fear. My
definition of fear is operational, and involves ANS response,
amygdala, etc. So to me, fearlessness is about the absence of
this response. You seem to be talking about perseverance in the
presence of fear. The mouse is indeed experiencing a fearful
state, Darla. And humans persevere in spite of their fear. This
is not fearlessness, only an observation of apparent
fearlessness. It is a literary definition, not a scientific
definition.

As for the fearless gene, you already have the platter and it's not silver.
The evidence is there before you easily found and just as easily
misinterpreted.
Your science found this evidence without any help, but has not yet realized
its significance.


The fearless gene. If I hadn't given you the benefit of the
doubt, I would have stomped on this fast and hard at the get-go.
But I went along with you, assuming you had overstated your
knowledge, and that through discussion I could come to
understand your point of view and your definitions, and let you
off the hook politely.

It is still my wish to let you off the hook politely. But I do
resent your allegations.

When it comes to fear, you're just going to have to go back and begin at the
beginning.
And stop judging observations and experimental results through a veil of
fear.
This is the greatest human barrier of all.


Stop projecting your fear onto others. Well, hell. First, define
"fear" in Darla World.

On a brighter note, we will be out of your hair soon.
Our study of individual human behaviour has reached another milestone, and
it is time to move on.


You're so human.

We will be ending our presence in alt.astronomy soon.
I will try to talk to as many as possible individually, and also to post a
goodbye message.

Darla and Pom will return in the Spring hopefully to initiate official
global contact.


We all need to take a break from Usenet now and then.

And Darla may want to post a few thoughts at that time.

So goodbye, Kali, and whether or not you're truly into neuroscience,


I'm really into it, although it's not my main line of research.
I've had a couple of graduate courses in neuroscience recently,
and have done some research in this area.

When you said that you are a student of neuroscience, I was
naturally interested, and naively hoped you weren't bluffing. As
we've gone along, I have become aware that this so-called
"fearlessness gene" and your theories on human fear are not
grounded in science, but are products of your own musing. And
that is okay, I suppose. What you do seem to know crosses over
into your make believe world and then gets lost.

You make cryptic references to old studies that have been
replicated many times and reinterpreted, you refuse to provide
evidence or references that I might follow up on, and you duck
out of discussion when you are called on to define your terms
and support your theory.

And then, ironically, you suggest that I have been stringing you
along. Who is stringing who along? What did you mean when you
said that you are a student of neuroscience? Did you mean that
in the literary sense, more along the lines of "enjoy reading
about it..."?

You suggest that if I really have studied neuroscience, then I
would have known what you were talking about. There are so very
many (scores! hundreds, even?!) of studies that use mice and
water as a stressor. If *you* were a student of neuroscience you
would know this, and you would know better than to expect
*anyone* to guess which one you were talking about, going off
"fearlessness" as a clue.

I do
still consider you to be one of the smartest people I've met.
(Well, you DID take notice of my "extraordinary talent", didn't you? G)


I think you're smart, too. Enjoy your coma-Virgo fantasies.

Yubiwan


Kali
--
Reason can answer questions, but imagination has to ask them.
- Ralph Gerard
  #317  
Old February 24th 06, 05:46 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

Dr. Why wrote:

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article _L6Kf.428442$qk4.333241@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 23:00:10
GMT, Dr. Why says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article Wm3Kf.41820$id5.19657@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:08:38
GMT, Dr. Why
says...

[...]

Please be more specific, Kali.
I have read all the websites and found nothing to indicate that I'm
believed
to be incorrect.
Perhaps I missed something?

Please provide evidence for your claim that "humans are
...genetically fearless human beings".

Okay, I shall provide evidence, but please be patient now as I have other
duties that must come first.


Take your time.

I've provided references to a body of evidence that contradicts
your claim. Look up "visual cliff" experiments with 6 month old
infants, in which they fear a perceived drop-off. They didn't
learn to feel the fear, it is innate. In other words, we are
hard wired to experience fear. It is important to our survival.
If you say that we are genetically fearless, then you'll need to
back up your statement with sound reasoning about evidence.


[...]

As usual, you and others are mistaking fear for something else.
Assume for the moment that I'm correct, please, Kali.
If they indeed are noting fear in these 6-mo. old infants incorrectly,

what
else could it be?

Would you like a hint?


Actually, something straightforward would be nice for a change.
But okay.

Drop a live mouse in a deep tub of water.
It scrambles in an attempt to escape drowning, and it eventually gives

up.
As you may say, though not yet dead, it has resigned itself to its fate.


Exhaustion is resignation to one's fate?

If you provided an example of a field mouse being chased by a
cat, who "plays dead", you might have something interesting.
Animals of prey will do this. Do *you* know why? Want a hint?

Now you reach in and save the mouse, let it run around a bit, then toss

it
back in the tub.
What is the difference in the way the mouse behaves from its first

attempt
to escape the tub?


You tell me.

Figure out why the mouse gave up the first time, and you will know what

the
infants are really feeling.


Exhaustion? Helplessness? What does this have to do with infants
who will instinctively avoid a visual cliff?

Don't believe me?


Actually, I'm having trouble understanding how you are putting
things together. There is an assumption that you seem to have
made about a 2nd trial stressed rat that I wouldn't make, and
then you suggest it has something to do with infants in the
visual cliff experiment. And I really, really don't know how any
of this suggests that "humans are genetically programmed to be
fearless."

Conduct the infant experiment yourself, but this time, after "saving" the
infant, subject the infant once more to the visual cliff.
You will note the same difference in behavior that you noted in the

mouse.

And the difference is? Just leave the infant out and tell me
what you think the mouse does. The rats I've worked with, when
they are put in water over several trials, generally behave the
same way; they swim and swim and swim until you take them out.
If we left them in, I imagine they'd become exhausted and drown
after a while.
Dr. Why


Kali
--
A bore is simply a nonentity who resents his humble lot in life,
and seeks satisfaction for his wounded ego by forcing himself on
his betters. - H. L. Mencken


It's obvious to me that you've been playin' wif me.
If you are indeed into neuroscience, which I doubt, then it must be at the
most rudimentary level.
No matter, Kali, because things have changed.

I was just speaking with Darla, and she reminded me of one of our
directives.
If humans already have evidence for something, and they are presently just
misinterpreting the evidence, then we can only guide you.
We cannot "silver platter" it for you.

In the case of the mouse, the first time in the water and the mouse gives
up, feels helpless, long, long before it becomes exhausted.
But you take the mouse out, then put it back in the water, and it won't stop
trying to escape until it becomes completely and totally exhausted.
Because the second time it knows something it did not know the first time:
there just might be a chance, however tiny, to escape.
If you were truly into neuroscience, you would have known about this long
tried and true experiment.
It's a classic.

As for the fearless gene, you already have the platter and it's not silver.
The evidence is there before you easily found and just as easily
misinterpreted.
Your science found this evidence without any help, but has not yet realized
its significance.

When it comes to fear, you're just going to have to go back and begin at the
beginning.
And stop judging observations and experimental results through a veil of
fear.
This is the greatest human barrier of all.

On a brighter note, we will be out of your hair soon.
Our study of individual human behaviour has reached another milestone, and
it is time to move on.
We will be ending our presence in alt.astronomy soon.
I will try to talk to as many as possible individually, and also to post a
goodbye message.

Darla and Pom will return in the Spring hopefully to initiate official
global contact.
And Darla may want to post a few thoughts at that time.

So goodbye, Kali, and whether or not you're truly into neuroscience, I do
still consider you to be one of the smartest people I've met.
(Well, you DID take notice of my "extraordinary talent", didn't you? G)

Yubiwan


A fine campaign speech, drama queen.

--
"Good come back ****!"

"Didn't you bet a merit badge in Gopher Choking, bugger Boy?"

"We don't discuss religion anymore you ****ing idiot! Eat some more ****"
-- Honest John, Christian evangelist
  #318  
Old February 24th 06, 05:49 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

Bookman wrote:

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:27:16 GMT, "Darla"
wrote:

Dr. Yubiwan, for Darla ---

"Bookman" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:03:59 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .

And the difference is? Just leave the infant out and tell me
what you think the mouse does. The rats I've worked with, when
they are put in water over several trials, generally behave the
same way; they swim and swim and swim until you take them out.
If we left them in, I imagine they'd become exhausted and drown
after a while.
Dr. Why

Kali


It's obvious to me that you've been playin' wif me.
If you are indeed into neuroscience, which I doubt, then it must be at

the
most rudimentary level.
No matter, Kali, because things have changed.

Kali hace achieved much SPNAK!


SO true!


Yep, she Spnaked you good. Did you enjoy it?




I was just speaking with Darla, and she reminded me of one of our
directives.
If humans already have evidence for something, and they are presently

just
misinterpreting the evidence, then we can only guide you.
We cannot "silver platter" it for you.

Evasion noted.


Couldn't be helped, BM.
Your initials? BM?
How unfortunate! G


Incorrect, since I am not Book Man, but rather "Bookman". The "BM" is
only is your head, as is obvius to the casual observer.



In the case of the mouse, the first time in the water and the mouse gives
up, feels helpless, long, long before it becomes exhausted.

Evidence?


DYOHW


It isn't my "HW". You made the k'lame, you do _your_ homework to back
it up. Otherwise your k'lame is known far and wide to be untrue.



But you take the mouse out, then put it back in the water, and it won't

stop
trying to escape until it becomes completely and totally exhausted.
Because the second time it knows something it did not know the first

time:
there just might be a chance, however tiny, to escape.
If you were truly into neuroscience, you would have known about this long
tried and true experiment.
It's a classic.

This relates to "fear" how"? Oh, that's right - it's an assertion
without evidence. How typical of a fake "alien".


No, it's Not an assertion w/o evidence, Bookman.


Yes, it is. You provided no evidence, just asserted your k'lame.

It's an assertion w/o REFERENCE.


Whate "reference"? Oh, that's right, you didn't DYOFHW, so there was
no reference.

There is ample evidence in your own science journals for the unlazy person
to discover when ready.


DYHW, then.


How typical of a fake "bookman". (juuuust kidding)


Suuure.




As for the fearless gene, you already have the platter and it's not

silver.
The evidence is there before you easily found and just as easily
misinterpreted.
Your science found this evidence without any help, but has not yet

realized
its significance.

Evasion noted.


Misinterpretation noted.


Lack of evidence is indeed an evasion, and as such was interpreted
correctly. Further evasion noted.




When it comes to fear, you're just going to have to go back and begin at

the
beginning.
And stop judging observations and experimental results through a veil of
fear.
This is the greatest human barrier of all.

Still evading.


PKB


Darla, you are hereby advised not to misuse terminology which you
clearly do not comprehend.




On a brighter note, we will be out of your hair soon.
Our study of individual human behaviour has reached another milestone,

and
it is time to move on.
We will be ending our presence in alt.astronomy soon.
I will try to talk to as many as possible individually, and also to post

a
goodbye message.

And another "goodbye forever" k'lame.


Never say forever.


Of course not - you never mean it, after all.




Darla and Pom will return in the Spring hopefully to initiate official
global contact.

Yeah, right.


That's the spirit! G
Good, healthy skepticism is OK.


And Darla may want to post a few thoughts at that time.

Talkig about yourself in the third person is primary ko0ksign,
"Darla".


Where would you Be without those neat koOksigns?
(Personally, I think the capital "oh" sukeys better than the zero, ymmv)


Since there is never a lack of ko0ks to provide them, the question
isn't relevant. HTH.




So goodbye, Kali, and whether or not you're truly into neuroscience, I do
still consider you to be one of the smartest people I've met.

You should, considering how she humiliated you.


redfaced
I AM SO CONFUSED!!!!


No surprise, really.



(Well, you DID take notice of my "extraordinary talent", didn't you? G)

Yeah, you are extraordinarily talented at ko0king out.

Note: Kali's evidence that infants are inherently afraid of "visual
cliffs" have been completely avoided.

I DECLARE KALI HACE ACHEIVED MUCH SPNAKNESS!1!

ESL!


aS iF aNYbODY gIVES a dURN, boOkman.


Get back to us[tinu] when you have mastered "caps lock" tech, OK?


I am SO sorry I failed to include your name personally on the thankyou list,
Bookman!


When will you be publishing your next lits?

There were some brief but interesting discussions, I remember.
If you'll forgive me for this humongous oversight, I promise to show you
some interesting books we


Who is the "we" you refer to, fakxored ayleeun? Voices in your head,
p'raps?

have rescued from library fires over the years.
Lost but not forgotten.


And a false promise to close, how typical.


Quite amazing, for all "their" claimed gazillions-old intelligence, the
fake alien porpoises are sans logical reasoning abilities.

--
"Good come back ****!"

"Didn't you bet a merit badge in Gopher Choking, bugger Boy?"

"We don't discuss religion anymore you ****ing idiot! Eat some more ****"
-- Honest John, Christian evangelist
  #319  
Old February 24th 06, 05:52 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

Dr. Why wrote:

"Charles D. Bohne" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 04:43:21 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

It was always thus, Charles.
And it's especially easy in this medium.

In this country internet providers do not allow for fake identities, at
least that's their official credo. In combination with local laws this
makes calumniation and libel a little bit more risky :-)

However, one must not neglect that if there were no kooks, there would be

no
Art Deco et al.

There are dumb and dull people, some of them might hold very insane
believes some might have nasty posting habits, calling them names and
label them "kooks" doesn't change much, does it?

So if someone shows up who is not a kook, but who exhibits a few
unmistakable kook signs,


:-) If this someone were one of their own pack, they would award
him/her with their "hook & sinker award" :-) ... but they are to anxious
to be ready to admit they have been taken in ;:

perhaps they bring all that down on themselves?



Whatever else it is, it's an internet and specially a Usenet education.
Eventually, the smart people change their handles and either tone it

down,
or they become superkooks.

Kookiness is in the mind of the beholder ;

Art and crew have probably Created far more kooks than they've ever
"killed".

Is this good or bad ;- ?
I would not mind their games as long as they'd stick to their rules and
they'd stay in AUK among themselves.

And my guess is this is precisely what they want to do.

Usenet --- Love it or Leave it! (and then return to Usenet as someone

else).

Changing my Identity is nothing I'd really ever thought about :-)
I love my product: C D B ;.

Anonimity breeds aliens and other kooky people, products of the

Remarkable
human imagination!

It does?

An awesome venue for studying individual human behaviour.

Indeed, ... you know that this is my profession.
Yubiwan

C.


And on that note, Charles, it is time to bid you adieu.
Our human study here in alt.astronomy is coming to a close.
We have disrupted the group long enough, now, and it's time to move on.

Darla will probably want to post a few thoughts when she returns in the
Spring.
Also, I intend to post a goodbye message soon.
I want you to know that I consider you to be one of the most fascinating
people I've ever known!

Y.


Mind the @$$/door interface on your way out, drama queen, and please
remember to take all your beach balls with you.

--
"Good come back ****!"

"Didn't you bet a merit badge in Gopher Choking, bugger Boy?"

"We don't discuss religion anymore you ****ing idiot! Eat some more ****"
-- Honest John, Christian evangelist
  #320  
Old February 24th 06, 05:53 AM posted to alt.astronomy,alt.pizza.delivery.drivers,alt.fan.art-bell,alt.usenet.kooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

[cowardly snecked AUK restored]

Charles D. Bohne wrote:

On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 07:20:10 GMT, "Dr. Why"
wrote:

And on that note, Charles, it is time to bid you adieu.
Our human study here in alt.astronomy is coming to a close.
We have disrupted the group long enough, now, and it's time to move on.

I already have answered that as a response to your post for HJ.


You misspelled "kookslurp", Chu*k.

Darla will probably want to post a few thoughts when she returns in the
Spring.

We are all looking forward to Darla's wise words.


Changing your tune again, fake alien?

Also, I intend to post a goodbye message soon.

Maybe you could leave us "some hope" ;-

I want you to know that I consider you to be one of the most fascinating
people I've ever known!

You are very welcome ;

C.

P.S.: Hope to meet you again.


How sweet.

--
"Good come back ****!"

"Didn't you bet a merit badge in Gopher Choking, bugger Boy?"

"We don't discuss religion anymore you ****ing idiot! Eat some more ****"
-- Honest John, Christian evangelist
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can't get out of the universe "My crew will blow it up"!!!!!!!!!!! zetasum Policy 0 February 5th 05 12:06 AM
Moon key to space future? James White Policy 90 January 6th 04 05:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.