Silly question, AC power plugs

[John Fields]

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF

 

[Ian Field]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF

Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

---
Not really...

Larkin left the ball in my court and I decided that his comments
weren't really worth replying to, so it was I who wandered off in that
instance.

krw's replies were mostly dreary PKB's and Larkin parroting, so I left
him with my view that he'd posted "Nothing of any consequence." just
to see whether he'll follow a carrot strung on a stick.

Then there's you; a gadfly who's apparently attracted to "boredom" and
finds it impossible to wander off.

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?

Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

 

[Ian Field]

<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:rvtst7tpqc1m3dutee0dc3eeeo2ftk8cjh@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered
off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own
Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

Dense enough to seed a black hole!

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:19:05 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:rvtst7tpqc1m3dutee0dc3eeeo2ftk8cjh@4ax.com...
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered
off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own
Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.



Dense enough to seed a black hole!

---
That's not really very clever in that the origin of a black hole or,
its "seeding", if you prefer, can begin with the accretion of as
little as two hydrogen atoms.

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

 

[Ian Field]

<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:a400u7t9imios1oblb38qtn6tnfd20cgmd@4ax.com...

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered
off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own
Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his
own
game.

Whoever kept dropping him on his head when he was little, didn't stop doing
it till he was well into his late teens.

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

Is that clear?

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:05:38 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

You really need to go back to elementary school. Although it obviously didn't
do you any good the first time.

Is that clear?

As transparent as you normally are.

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

You are one black pot. ...what an idiot!

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:37:37 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:a400u7t9imios1oblb38qtn6tnfd20cgmd@4ax.com...
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered
off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own
Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his
own
game.


Whoever kept dropping him on his head when he was little, didn't stop doing
it till he was well into his late teens.

He played ball on the Harlem Globetrotters?

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:22:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:05:38 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

You really need to go back to elementary school. Although it obviously didn't
do you any good the first time.

Is that clear?

As transparent as you normally are.

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

You are one black pot. ...what an idiot!

---
Since you earlier stated: "As transparent as you normally are.",

and you now claim that: "You are one black pot."

How would you resolve the dichotomy?

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:23:33 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:22:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:05:38 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

You really need to go back to elementary school. Although it obviously didn't
do you any good the first time.

Is that clear?

As transparent as you normally are.

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

You are one black pot. ...what an idiot!

---
Since you earlier stated: "As transparent as you normally are.",

and you now claim that: "You are one black pot."

How would you resolve the dichotomy?

I wouldn't, were I talking to a total blockhead, like you.

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:18:15 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:23:33 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:22:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:05:38 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

You really need to go back to elementary school. Although it obviously didn't
do you any good the first time.

Is that clear?

As transparent as you normally are.

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

You are one black pot. ...what an idiot!

---
Since you earlier stated: "As transparent as you normally are.",

and you now claim that: "You are one black pot."

How would you resolve the dichotomy?

I wouldn't, were I talking to a total blockhead, like you.

---
Rather a Neanderthal dodge, since you've admitted that your mutually
contradictory statements are at odds with each other but that you
refuse to resolve the dichotomy because a "total blockhead" brought
the faux pas to your attention.


--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:46:02 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:18:15 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:23:33 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:22:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 16:05:38 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:02:23 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:10:02 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 00:32:05 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:38:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:36:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:27:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:40:08 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:25:54 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gpcst7hr953dvcrm3mcb40nr83bt6n1esj@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:19:12 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

---
Nothing of any consequence.

--
JF


Looks like everyone's got bored with your crazy ranting and wandered off.

I was wondering then the old perv would get bored with his own Slomanesque
blathering.

---
Did you perhaps mean "when"?


Are you that stupid? ...of *course* you are.

---
Finding mistakes isn't stupid, refusing to admit to them - much like
your refusal to admit to your earlier error of using incorrect
mathematical notation - is.

Wow! You really *are* that stupid. You may have just beat DimBulb at his own
game.

---
You have a rather primitive way of arguing and you're really quite
easy to see through.

Your tiny mind may think I was trying to be opaque but, no, it's really quite
simple; you are *stupid*.

---
You seem to have missed the part where I said you were easy to see
through, which - in conventional American English - is quite different
from accusing you of being opaque.

You really need to go back to elementary school. Although it obviously didn't
do you any good the first time.

Is that clear?

As transparent as you normally are.

Also, you seem to be trying to convince yourself that a lie repeated
often enough will somehow magically turn it into the truth, which
lends credence to my claim that your arguments are vapid.

You are one black pot. ...what an idiot!

---
Since you earlier stated: "As transparent as you normally are.",

and you now claim that: "You are one black pot."

How would you resolve the dichotomy?

I wouldn't, were I talking to a total blockhead, like you.

---
Rather a Neanderthal dodge,

Gotta deal with some people all the way down at their level.