Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Doystoyevski or some Russian novelist said something to the effect"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
Although men are accused of not knowing their own weakness, yet
perhaps few know their own strength. It is in men as in soils, where
sometimes there is a vein of gold which the owner knows not of.
-- Jonathan Swift
Notice the dodge?Put out the dunce shoe and the dunces fall over themselves trying to
get their foot to fit.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
This quote is usually self-applied by fools and kooks.
Not that that's true or anyithing but take a gander at the OP.
All I did was post the quote w/o comment.
By your theory the dunces immediately appeared and applied it to
themselves.
Well at least you aren't swearing. That reduces readership.Those who are
truly insightful are also wise enough not to apply it publicly to
themselves.
What would happen if they did?
Some dunce typing "LOL!"?
Only a complete idiot would give a rat's ass about a dunce typing
"LOL!"
LOL,
I hate to burst your bubble, but anyone can google "Bret Cahill" andyou certainly seem to be making quite a commotion over it!
Not there anyway.LOL,
Well at least you aren't swearing. That reduces readership.
you certainly seem to be making quite a commotion over it!
I hate to burst your bubble, but anyone can google "Bret Cahill" and
find out his real interests.
But they cannot look at your cartoon onwww.bretcahill.com'cos it's not
displayed anymore.
Photographs of cards? What did that require? A camera?Embarrassed by the comparison with John Larkin's site?
.. . .You can brag or you can be modest but if you do both in the same
thread all kinds of flags and alarms are going to go off.
Somewhere Nietzsche debunks that one too but that's an entirelyIt's perfectly appropriate to brag about being modest.
---This reminds one of perjury convictions. It's common to lie under
oath. The police do it all the time. The definition of perjury,
however, isn't lying but contradictory testimony under oath.
You can brag or you can be modest but if you do both in the same
thread all kinds of flags and alarms are going to go off.
. . .
It's perfectly appropriate to brag about being modest.
Somewhere Nietzsche debunks that one too but that's an entirely
different issue.
---You were trying to garner respect by claiming you had a money making
patent and then you suddenly became too modest to post the patent
number.
---Now ignoring what 99.999% of functional readers believe, that you are
a delusional loser and you have no money making patent, we still know
by your _own_ posting that you cannot make up your silly head:
---Do you want respect for having a patent?
Or are you modest about your patent?
---And _no_ being respected for being modest is _not_ the issue.
The problem with acting stoopid is, well, everyone just thinks you are
stoopid.
rlbell.ns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 22, 10:06 pm, "BobW" <nimby_GIMME_SOME_S...@roadrunner.com
wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
message
news:9vvua49tgus4il3fujl660055ar34b6ut4@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:08:05 +0200, QuantumDot
d...@ohnoyoudont.co.za> wrote:
On 2008-08-22 22:57:40 +0200, BretCah...@peoplepc.com said:
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
This quote is usually self-applied by fools and kooks. Those who
are truly insightful are also wise enough not to apply it publicly
to themselves.
It's not true anyhow. Shakespeare; Feynman; Einstein; Kovacs;
Kelvin; all revered in their time.
Can anybody name a real genius who was attacked by all available
dunces?
Galileo.
One of the Great Myths of modern times was that Galileo was persecuted
for describing the truth of the planets. He was in fact lightly
punished for being a tactless boor who could label a friend he knew
since childhood as an simpleton to advance point (even if that was not
what he meant to do). Unfortunately for Galileo, that man he had
known since childhood was the pope, so Galileo was placed under house
arrest in a luxurious papal palace. It was not what he said, but how he said it.
How odd that Bruno got burnt at the stake.
Galileo's troubles was nearly fifty years after the papacy
started to sponsor astronomical research, in a big way.
And didnt like what that sponsoring produced.
The best way to describe Galileo is that, while he was scientifically brilliant,
he was sorely lacking in the people skills needed for academic infighting.
He did manage to do pretty well in that regard, avoided getting burnt at
the stake and ended up with a reasonably comfortable existence instead.
I encourage attempters. Just make sure it isn't something that willThis one is even easier to call than the attempt to impress by
claiming a profitable patent and then being too modest to post the
patent number.
Wrong again.
It isn't modesty, its an attempt to rankle you
Can you even find _one_ sock puppet who will help you pretend you haveby not letting you have
your way,
The problem with acting stoopid is, well, everyone just thinks you areI must confess, however, I'm a little curious. �How do you manage to
make yourself look increasingly stupid every time you post?
I don't; it's an optical illusion
Is sounding like a delusional loser part of your routine too?It wasn't a pretend patent at all, it was a document issued to me by
the Government of The United States of America which states that I'm
an inventor. ďż˝
---This one is even easier to call than the attempt to impress by
claiming a profitable patent and then being too modest to post the
patent number.
Wrong again.
It isn't modesty, its an attempt to rankle you
I encourage attempters. Just make sure it isn't something that will
get you the Darwin award.
---Or trying to rewrite the public record.
---by not letting you have
your way,
Can you even find _one_ sock puppet who will help you pretend you have
a patent?
---I must confess, however, I'm a little curious. ?How do you manage to
make yourself look increasingly stupid every time you post?
I don't; it's an optical illusion
The problem with acting stoopid is, well, everyone just thinks you are
stoopid.
---It wasn't a pretend patent at all, it was a document issued to me by
the Government of The United States of America which states that I'm
an inventor. ?
Is sounding like a delusional loser part of your routine too?
You are a fool.Can you even find _one_ sock puppet who will help you pretend you have
a patent?
You have certainly shown your stupidity on many occasions, ergo,.......I must confess, however, I'm a little curious. ?How do you manage to
make yourself look increasingly stupid every time you post?
I don't; it's an optical illusion
The problem with acting stoopid is, well, everyone just thinks you are
stoopid.
. . .
It wasn't a pretend patent at all, it was a document issued to me by
the Government of The United States of America which states that I'm
an inventor. ?
Is sounding like a delusional loser part of your routine too?
Bret Cahill
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
So, no answer to the question, then? I'll repeat it for the casualThe any inferences that the original poster applied it to anyone here
can only be the result of projecting.
Childhood? You have a source for that? It's not necessarily easy to proveOn Aug 22, 10:06 pm, "BobW" <nimby_GIMME_SOME_S...@roadrunner.com
wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:9vvua49tgus4il3fujl660055ar34b6ut4@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:08:05 +0200, QuantumDot <d...@ohnoyoudont.co.za
wrote:
On 2008-08-22 22:57:40 +0200, BretCah...@peoplepc.com said:
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
This quote is usually self-applied by fools and kooks. Those who are
truly insightful are also wise enough not to apply it publicly to
themselves.
It's not true anyhow. Shakespeare; Feynman; Einstein; Kovacs; Kelvin;
all revered in their time.
Can anybody name a real genius who was attacked by all available
dunces?
John
Galileo.
One of the Great Myths of modern times was that Galileo was persecuted
for describing the truth of the planets. He was in fact lightly
punished for being a tactless boor who could label a friend he knew
since childhood as an simpleton to advance point (even if that was not
what he meant to do).
Wrong. He was detained in good quarters when he had been ordered to RomeUnfortunately for Galileo, that man he had
known since childhood was the pope, so Galileo was placed under house
arrest in a luxurious papal palace.
Really? If you want to know what the dunces actually said, try readingIt was not what he said, but how
he said it.
No, he had them just fine for academic infighting. Have you ever *seen*Galileo's troubles was nearly fifty years after the papacy started to
sponsor astronomical research, in a big way.
The best way to describe Galileo is that, while he was scientifically
brilliant, he was sorely lacking in the people skills needed for
academic infighting.
Notwithstanding the confident manner of some person writing in Wikipedia,On Aug 23, 2:43 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
rlbell.ns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 22, 10:06 pm, "BobW" <nimby_GIMME_SOME_S...@roadrunner.com
wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
message
news:9vvua49tgus4il3fujl660055ar34b6ut4@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:08:05 +0200, QuantumDot
d...@ohnoyoudont.co.za> wrote:
On 2008-08-22 22:57:40 +0200, BretCah...@peoplepc.com said:
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
This quote is usually self-applied by fools and kooks. Those who
are truly insightful are also wise enough not to apply it publicly
to themselves.
It's not true anyhow. Shakespeare; Feynman; Einstein; Kovacs;
Kelvin; all revered in their time.
Can anybody name a real genius who was attacked by all available
dunces?
Galileo.
One of the Great Myths of modern times was that Galileo was persecuted
for describing the truth of the planets. He was in fact lightly
punished for being a tactless boor who could label a friend he knew
since childhood as an simpleton to advance point (even if that was not
what he meant to do). Unfortunately for Galileo, that man he had
known since childhood was the pope, so Galileo was placed under house
arrest in a luxurious papal palace. It was not what he said, but how he said it.
How odd that Bruno got burnt at the stake.
Galileo's troubles was nearly fifty years after the papacy
started to sponsor astronomical research, in a big way.
And didnt like what that sponsoring produced.
The best way to describe Galileo is that, while he was scientifically brilliant,
he was sorely lacking in the people skills needed for academic infighting.
He did manage to do pretty well in that regard, avoided getting burnt at
the stake and ended up with a reasonably comfortable existence instead.
It was not odd that Bruno got burnt at the stake. From Wikipedia, his
heresies were:
* Holding opinions contrary to the Catholic Faith and speaking
against it and its ministers.
* Holding erroneous opinions about the Trinity, about Christ's
divinity and Incarnation.
* Holding erroneous opinions about Christ.
* Holding erroneous opinions about Transubstantiation and Mass.
* Claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their
eternity.
* Believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the
human soul into brutes.
* Dealing in magics and divination.
* Denying the Virginity of Mary.
Oh yeah, sure. Also they didn't burn Joan of Arc. Really. It was theIt was not the catholic church that burnt him at the stake. He was
convicted as a heretic and surrendered to the local secular authority
for sentencing.
Where on earth would that idea come from?His heresy was equated with treason by the secular
authoirities and he was punished as a traitor.
That he was also a mathematician and philosopher had little to do his
heretical opinions.
Or, in modern terms, the bumper sticker "When you're as good as I am, it's"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
"Invention is the talent of youth, as judgment is of age."
-- Jonathan Swift
"Fun is the father of invention."
-- Bret Cahill
"Only nobodies are ever modest."
-- Goethe
Keep in mind that the Catholic church (as well as the LDS church) spendsOn Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:58:20 UTC, "rlbell.nsuid@gmail.com"
rlbell.nsuid@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 23, 2:43 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
rlbell.ns...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 22, 10:06 pm, "BobW" <nimby_GIMME_SOME_S...@roadrunner.com
wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
message
news:9vvua49tgus4il3fujl660055ar34b6ut4@4ax.com...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:08:05 +0200, QuantumDot
d...@ohnoyoudont.co.za> wrote:
On 2008-08-22 22:57:40 +0200, BretCah...@peoplepc.com said:
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
This quote is usually self-applied by fools and kooks. Those who
are truly insightful are also wise enough not to apply it publicly
to themselves.
It's not true anyhow. Shakespeare; Feynman; Einstein; Kovacs;
Kelvin; all revered in their time.
Can anybody name a real genius who was attacked by all available
dunces?
Galileo.
One of the Great Myths of modern times was that Galileo was persecuted
for describing the truth of the planets. He was in fact lightly
punished for being a tactless boor who could label a friend he knew
since childhood as an simpleton to advance point (even if that was not
what he meant to do). Unfortunately for Galileo, that man he had
known since childhood was the pope, so Galileo was placed under house
arrest in a luxurious papal palace. It was not what he said, but how he
said it.
How odd that Bruno got burnt at the stake.
Galileo's troubles was nearly fifty years after the papacy
started to sponsor astronomical research, in a big way.
And didnt like what that sponsoring produced.
The best way to describe Galileo is that, while he was scientifically
brilliant,
he was sorely lacking in the people skills needed for academic infighting.
He did manage to do pretty well in that regard, avoided getting burnt at
the stake and ended up with a reasonably comfortable existence instead.
It was not odd that Bruno got burnt at the stake. From Wikipedia, his
heresies were:
* Holding opinions contrary to the Catholic Faith and speaking
against it and its ministers.
* Holding erroneous opinions about the Trinity, about Christ's
divinity and Incarnation.
* Holding erroneous opinions about Christ.
* Holding erroneous opinions about Transubstantiation and Mass.
* Claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their
eternity.
* Believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the
human soul into brutes.
* Dealing in magics and divination.
* Denying the Virginity of Mary.
Notwithstanding the confident manner of some person writing in Wikipedia,
the exact reasons for Bruno's condemnation are not known. The record of
the outcome of his trial has been lost except for one fragment -- unlike
that of Galileo, which we can read and judge for ourselves. Some things
are known: he was no astronomer; he held a sort of Copernican opinion;
this was connected with his idea of an infinite universe; the authorities
hated that; and he engaged in a bunch of other heresies that they also
hated. Beyond that, it's pretty much conjecture and reconstruction and
issues that are still unresolved among scholars.
No, I exaggerated there: in the 20th century a number of fragmentary
pieces of evidence were collected. If anyone has read the scholarly
analyses of these, I'd be highly interested in seeing a good summary. But
it is reconstruction, and one sort of eye-witness account, not the actual
text.
It was not the catholic church that burnt him at the stake. He was
convicted as a heretic and surrendered to the local secular authority
for sentencing.
Oh yeah, sure. Also they didn't burn Joan of Arc. Really. It was the
practice to hand people over to the authorities to get their hands dirty
with the business of killing people horribly, which had to be done, of
course, but not directly by the servants of the Prince of Peace. Those who
have had some contact with Christianity might think of another heretic,
condemend 15 1/2 centuries earlier, and also handed over the Civil
Authorities for the dirty work; though the politics of that case were more
complicated.
His heresy was equated with treason by the secular
authoirities and he was punished as a traitor.
That he was also a mathematician and philosopher had little to do his
heretical opinions.
Where on earth would that idea come from?
---John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
And only a few years ago admitted that Geocentrism was wrong.
No they didnt. They actually admitted that they treated Galileo badly at that time.
---And didnt have the balls to even mention Bruno.
---"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-- Jonathan Swift
A wise old owl sat on an oak; The more he saw the less he spoke; The
less he spoke the more he heard; Why aren't we like that wise old bird?
Most are.
That's why I'm a Jeffersonian democrat.
"Bret Cahill" <BretCahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7f86f200-0f0b-486a-9826-a62c7c1e3e55@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
I hate to burst your bubble, but anyone can google "Bret Cahill" and
find out his real interests.
But they cannot look at your cartoon on www.bretcahill.com 'cos it's not
displayed anymore.
Not there anyway.
So tell us, where is it then? I bet you don't say.
Embarrassed by the comparison with John Larkin's site?
Photographs of cards? What did that require? A camera?
A camera, certainly, but that part is trivial. What is of more importance is
something worthwhile to photograph with the camera. You have nothing to show
us, absolutely nothing.
If you had no access to a camera there is still text that you could display.
John Larkin's site at www.highlandtechnology.com not only shows "Photographs
of cards" as you try to deride them but textual descriptions of their
operations and specifications.
You are a fraud with nothing to display. Why do you even have a website if
there is nothing there?
--
Stu Forrest
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote
SJF wrote:
You are a fraud with nothing to display. Why do you even have a website
if
there is nothing there?
Everything Bret knows is on that website.
Yes, of course!
I invite everyone to visit www.bretcahill.com to see for themselves the
vacuous content of his site reflecting the vacuous content of his mind. (Be
quick because he will soon shut down the site to prevent everyone seeing it
and laughing.)