Re: The great lie that is evolution
"C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2hrr54Fg08hiU1@uni-berlin.de... > Kadaitcha Man wrote: > > "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:2hrqo5FghfbrU1@uni-berlin.de... > >> Kadaitcha Man wrote: > >>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >>> news:2hrpibFg4gl9U1@uni-berlin.de... > >>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: > >>>>> "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message > >>>>> news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > >>>>>> news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > >>>>>>> "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote > >>>>>>> in message news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... > >>>>>>>>>>> This statement cannot be proved. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> which one, and why? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have to > >>>>>>>>> contend with self-referential logic, not just notions of basic > >>>>>>>>> syntax, so I don't fancy your chances of figuring it out. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans > >>>>>>>>> have such a tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of even > >>>>>>>>> the most mildly twisted notion escapes them. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> this is the point where i stopped reading > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You are a liar. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> because it became obvious that not > >>>>>>>> only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Shame on you, eh. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> but you were ignorant, > >>>>>>>> arrogant, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> And that's a revelation to you, is it? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> and instead of having any interest in debate > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is > >>>>>>> very interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth > >>>>>>> outrunning provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and > >>>>>>> mathematical philosphies are founded upon it. More shame on you, > >>>>>>> eh. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> were concerned solely > >>>>>>>> with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, > >>>>>>> close-set eye that sits in the middle of your steeply sloping > >>>>>>> forehead on the words 'Part 1 demonstrably shows that the self > >>>>>>> is the notional equivalent of "this sentence is unprovable".' > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you > >>>>>>> +=======================================+ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> SLAP! > >>>>>> Fingerprints and DNA > >>>>> > >>>>> <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> > >>>>> > >>>>> You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, because > >>>>> DNA was dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable supporting > >>>>> argument, and to a level of proof acceptable in courts of law. > >>>>> > >>>>> You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. > >>>> > >>>> Who said that? > >>> > >>> Who said what, ----nuts? > >> > >> There it is again!! > > > > > Ah...seems to be all better now. I was getting worried. You should be worried. You seem to be hearing voices when you read something. -- Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402 Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500 gentoo Linux kernel 2.6.5 <-- rolled my own |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
"Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message news:c9beb8.11kk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:T82uc.10341$%T.7603@okepread05... > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > news:c9bdnm.15j0.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... > > > > > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > > > news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > > > "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote in > > > message > > > > > news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... > > > > > > > > > This statement cannot be proved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which one, and why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have to > > > contend > > > > > with > > > > > > > self-referential logic, not just notions of basic syntax, so I > > don't > > > > > fancy > > > > > > > your chances of figuring it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans > have > > > such > > > > a > > > > > > > tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of even the most > mildly > > > > > twisted > > > > > > > notion escapes them. > > > > > > > > > > > > this is the point where i stopped reading > > > > > > > > > > You are a liar. > > > > > > > > > > > because it became obvious that not > > > > > > only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) > > > > > > > > > > Shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > but you were ignorant, > > > > > > arrogant, > > > > > > > > > > And that's a revelation to you, is it? > > > > > > > > > > > and instead of having any interest in debate > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is very > > > > > interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth outrunning > > > > > provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and mathematical > > > philosphies > > > > > are founded upon it. More shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > were concerned solely > > > > > > with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. > > > > > > > > > > Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, close-set > > eye > > > > that > > > > > sits in the middle of your steeply sloping forehead on the words > 'Part > > 1 > > > > > demonstrably shows that the self is the notional equivalent of "this > > > > > sentence is unprovable".' > > > > > > > > > > PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you > > > > > +=======================================+ > > > > > > > > SLAP! > > > > Fingerprints and DNA > > > > > > <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> > > > > > > You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, because DNA > was > > > dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable supporting argument, and > > to > > > a level of proof acceptable in courts of law. > > > > > > You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. > > > > > Did read it and DNA was not fully dismissed. It was delt with in the same > > lame way you deal with things. with nonsense that sounds convincing. > > Then counter argue, ----tard, otherwise you have nothing other than > empty-minded blubberings. Nothing surprising there, really. > > Nope- I just like hearing you squeal. A little louder. Im almost there |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
"Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message news:c9beb8.11kk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:T82uc.10341$%T.7603@okepread05... > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > news:c9bdnm.15j0.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... > > > > > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > > > news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > > > "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote in > > > message > > > > > news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... > > > > > > > > > This statement cannot be proved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which one, and why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have to > > > contend > > > > > with > > > > > > > self-referential logic, not just notions of basic syntax, so I > > don't > > > > > fancy > > > > > > > your chances of figuring it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans > have > > > such > > > > a > > > > > > > tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of even the most > mildly > > > > > twisted > > > > > > > notion escapes them. > > > > > > > > > > > > this is the point where i stopped reading > > > > > > > > > > You are a liar. > > > > > > > > > > > because it became obvious that not > > > > > > only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) > > > > > > > > > > Shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > but you were ignorant, > > > > > > arrogant, > > > > > > > > > > And that's a revelation to you, is it? > > > > > > > > > > > and instead of having any interest in debate > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is very > > > > > interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth outrunning > > > > > provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and mathematical > > > philosphies > > > > > are founded upon it. More shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > were concerned solely > > > > > > with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. > > > > > > > > > > Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, close-set > > eye > > > > that > > > > > sits in the middle of your steeply sloping forehead on the words > 'Part > > 1 > > > > > demonstrably shows that the self is the notional equivalent of "this > > > > > sentence is unprovable".' > > > > > > > > > > PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you > > > > > +=======================================+ > > > > > > > > SLAP! > > > > Fingerprints and DNA > > > > > > <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> > > > > > > You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, because DNA > was > > > dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable supporting argument, and > > to > > > a level of proof acceptable in courts of law. > > > > > > You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. > > > > > Did read it and DNA was not fully dismissed. It was delt with in the same > > lame way you deal with things. with nonsense that sounds convincing. > > Then counter argue, ----tard, otherwise you have nothing other than > empty-minded blubberings. Nothing surprising there, really. > > Nope- I just like hearing you squeal. A little louder. Im almost there |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
"Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message news:c9beb8.11kk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:T82uc.10341$%T.7603@okepread05... > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > news:c9bdnm.15j0.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... > > > > > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > > > news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > > > "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote in > > > message > > > > > news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... > > > > > > > > > This statement cannot be proved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which one, and why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have to > > > contend > > > > > with > > > > > > > self-referential logic, not just notions of basic syntax, so I > > don't > > > > > fancy > > > > > > > your chances of figuring it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans > have > > > such > > > > a > > > > > > > tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of even the most > mildly > > > > > twisted > > > > > > > notion escapes them. > > > > > > > > > > > > this is the point where i stopped reading > > > > > > > > > > You are a liar. > > > > > > > > > > > because it became obvious that not > > > > > > only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) > > > > > > > > > > Shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > but you were ignorant, > > > > > > arrogant, > > > > > > > > > > And that's a revelation to you, is it? > > > > > > > > > > > and instead of having any interest in debate > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is very > > > > > interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth outrunning > > > > > provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and mathematical > > > philosphies > > > > > are founded upon it. More shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > were concerned solely > > > > > > with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. > > > > > > > > > > Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, close-set > > eye > > > > that > > > > > sits in the middle of your steeply sloping forehead on the words > 'Part > > 1 > > > > > demonstrably shows that the self is the notional equivalent of "this > > > > > sentence is unprovable".' > > > > > > > > > > PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you > > > > > +=======================================+ > > > > > > > > SLAP! > > > > Fingerprints and DNA > > > > > > <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> > > > > > > You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, because DNA > was > > > dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable supporting argument, and > > to > > > a level of proof acceptable in courts of law. > > > > > > You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. > > > > > Did read it and DNA was not fully dismissed. It was delt with in the same > > lame way you deal with things. with nonsense that sounds convincing. > > Then counter argue, ----tard, otherwise you have nothing other than > empty-minded blubberings. Nothing surprising there, really. > > Nope- I just like hearing you squeal. A little louder. Im almost there |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
"Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message news:c9beb8.11kk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:T82uc.10341$%T.7603@okepread05... > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > news:c9bdnm.15j0.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... > > > > > > > > "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message > > > > news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... > > > > > "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote in > > > message > > > > > news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... > > > > > > > > > This statement cannot be proved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > which one, and why? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have to > > > contend > > > > > with > > > > > > > self-referential logic, not just notions of basic syntax, so I > > don't > > > > > fancy > > > > > > > your chances of figuring it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans > have > > > such > > > > a > > > > > > > tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of even the most > mildly > > > > > twisted > > > > > > > notion escapes them. > > > > > > > > > > > > this is the point where i stopped reading > > > > > > > > > > You are a liar. > > > > > > > > > > > because it became obvious that not > > > > > > only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) > > > > > > > > > > Shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > but you were ignorant, > > > > > > arrogant, > > > > > > > > > > And that's a revelation to you, is it? > > > > > > > > > > > and instead of having any interest in debate > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is very > > > > > interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth outrunning > > > > > provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and mathematical > > > philosphies > > > > > are founded upon it. More shame on you, eh. > > > > > > > > > > > were concerned solely > > > > > > with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. > > > > > > > > > > Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, close-set > > eye > > > > that > > > > > sits in the middle of your steeply sloping forehead on the words > 'Part > > 1 > > > > > demonstrably shows that the self is the notional equivalent of "this > > > > > sentence is unprovable".' > > > > > > > > > > PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you > > > > > +=======================================+ > > > > > > > > SLAP! > > > > Fingerprints and DNA > > > > > > <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> > > > > > > You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, because DNA > was > > > dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable supporting argument, and > > to > > > a level of proof acceptable in courts of law. > > > > > > You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. > > > > > Did read it and DNA was not fully dismissed. It was delt with in the same > > lame way you deal with things. with nonsense that sounds convincing. > > Then counter argue, ----tard, otherwise you have nothing other than > empty-minded blubberings. Nothing surprising there, really. > > Nope- I just like hearing you squeal. A little louder. Im almost there |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:2hrr54Fg08hiU1@uni-berlin.de... >> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:2hrqo5FghfbrU1@uni-berlin.de... >>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:2hrpibFg4gl9U1@uni-berlin.de... >>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>>>> "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... >>>>>>>>> "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote >>>>>>>>> in message news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> This statement cannot be proved. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which one, and why? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have >>>>>>>>>>> to contend with self-referential logic, not just notions of >>>>>>>>>>> basic syntax, so I don't fancy your chances of figuring it >>>>>>>>>>> out. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans >>>>>>>>>>> have such a tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of >>>>>>>>>>> even the most mildly twisted notion escapes them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> this is the point where i stopped reading >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are a liar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> because it became obvious that not >>>>>>>>>> only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Shame on you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> but you were ignorant, >>>>>>>>>> arrogant, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And that's a revelation to you, is it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and instead of having any interest in debate >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is >>>>>>>>> very interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth >>>>>>>>> outrunning provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and >>>>>>>>> mathematical philosphies are founded upon it. More shame on >>>>>>>>> you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> were concerned solely >>>>>>>>>> with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, >>>>>>>>> close-set eye that sits in the middle of your steeply sloping >>>>>>>>> forehead on the words 'Part 1 demonstrably shows that the self >>>>>>>>> is the notional equivalent of "this sentence is unprovable".' >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you >>>>>>>>> +=======================================+ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SLAP! >>>>>>>> Fingerprints and DNA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, >>>>>>> because DNA was dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable >>>>>>> supporting argument, and to a level of proof acceptable in >>>>>>> courts of law. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who said that? >>>>> >>>>> Who said what, ----nuts? >>>> >>>> There it is again!! >> >> >> >> >> Ah...seems to be all better now. I was getting worried. > > You should be worried. You seem to be hearing voices when you read > something. AAIIGGHHH!! This is freakin' me out. -- C'Pi "It's because of men like you that all must be destroyed." |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:2hrr54Fg08hiU1@uni-berlin.de... >> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:2hrqo5FghfbrU1@uni-berlin.de... >>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:2hrpibFg4gl9U1@uni-berlin.de... >>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>>>> "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... >>>>>>>>> "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote >>>>>>>>> in message news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> This statement cannot be proved. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which one, and why? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have >>>>>>>>>>> to contend with self-referential logic, not just notions of >>>>>>>>>>> basic syntax, so I don't fancy your chances of figuring it >>>>>>>>>>> out. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans >>>>>>>>>>> have such a tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of >>>>>>>>>>> even the most mildly twisted notion escapes them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> this is the point where i stopped reading >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are a liar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> because it became obvious that not >>>>>>>>>> only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Shame on you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> but you were ignorant, >>>>>>>>>> arrogant, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And that's a revelation to you, is it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and instead of having any interest in debate >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is >>>>>>>>> very interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth >>>>>>>>> outrunning provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and >>>>>>>>> mathematical philosphies are founded upon it. More shame on >>>>>>>>> you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> were concerned solely >>>>>>>>>> with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, >>>>>>>>> close-set eye that sits in the middle of your steeply sloping >>>>>>>>> forehead on the words 'Part 1 demonstrably shows that the self >>>>>>>>> is the notional equivalent of "this sentence is unprovable".' >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you >>>>>>>>> +=======================================+ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SLAP! >>>>>>>> Fingerprints and DNA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, >>>>>>> because DNA was dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable >>>>>>> supporting argument, and to a level of proof acceptable in >>>>>>> courts of law. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who said that? >>>>> >>>>> Who said what, ----nuts? >>>> >>>> There it is again!! >> >> >> >> >> Ah...seems to be all better now. I was getting worried. > > You should be worried. You seem to be hearing voices when you read > something. AAIIGGHHH!! This is freakin' me out. -- C'Pi "It's because of men like you that all must be destroyed." |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:2hrr54Fg08hiU1@uni-berlin.de... >> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:2hrqo5FghfbrU1@uni-berlin.de... >>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:2hrpibFg4gl9U1@uni-berlin.de... >>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>>>> "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... >>>>>>>>> "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote >>>>>>>>> in message news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> This statement cannot be proved. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which one, and why? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have >>>>>>>>>>> to contend with self-referential logic, not just notions of >>>>>>>>>>> basic syntax, so I don't fancy your chances of figuring it >>>>>>>>>>> out. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans >>>>>>>>>>> have such a tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of >>>>>>>>>>> even the most mildly twisted notion escapes them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> this is the point where i stopped reading >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are a liar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> because it became obvious that not >>>>>>>>>> only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Shame on you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> but you were ignorant, >>>>>>>>>> arrogant, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And that's a revelation to you, is it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and instead of having any interest in debate >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is >>>>>>>>> very interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth >>>>>>>>> outrunning provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and >>>>>>>>> mathematical philosphies are founded upon it. More shame on >>>>>>>>> you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> were concerned solely >>>>>>>>>> with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, >>>>>>>>> close-set eye that sits in the middle of your steeply sloping >>>>>>>>> forehead on the words 'Part 1 demonstrably shows that the self >>>>>>>>> is the notional equivalent of "this sentence is unprovable".' >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you >>>>>>>>> +=======================================+ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SLAP! >>>>>>>> Fingerprints and DNA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, >>>>>>> because DNA was dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable >>>>>>> supporting argument, and to a level of proof acceptable in >>>>>>> courts of law. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who said that? >>>>> >>>>> Who said what, ----nuts? >>>> >>>> There it is again!! >> >> >> >> >> Ah...seems to be all better now. I was getting worried. > > You should be worried. You seem to be hearing voices when you read > something. AAIIGGHHH!! This is freakin' me out. -- C'Pi "It's because of men like you that all must be destroyed." |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:2hrr54Fg08hiU1@uni-berlin.de... >> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> news:2hrqo5FghfbrU1@uni-berlin.de... >>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>> "C'Pi" <askme@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:2hrpibFg4gl9U1@uni-berlin.de... >>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote: >>>>>>> "1" <1@home.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:FH1uc.10100$%T.4836@okepread05... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:c99r1m.tsk.1@kadaitcha.ath.cx... >>>>>>>>> "James Q. Morrissey" <mellon_collie2003@btopenworld.com> wrote >>>>>>>>> in message news:c98n6r$clp$1@sparta.btinternet.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>> This statement cannot be proved. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> which one, and why? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You work it out, you ------- moron. Of course, you'll have >>>>>>>>>>> to contend with self-referential logic, not just notions of >>>>>>>>>>> basic syntax, so I don't fancy your chances of figuring it >>>>>>>>>>> out. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would not be surprised if you were ameriKKKan. ameriKKKans >>>>>>>>>>> have such a tenuous grasp on language that the meaning of >>>>>>>>>>> even the most mildly twisted notion escapes them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> this is the point where i stopped reading >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are a liar. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> because it became obvious that not >>>>>>>>>> only were you bigoted (i'm british, actually) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Shame on you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> but you were ignorant, >>>>>>>>>> arrogant, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And that's a revelation to you, is it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and instead of having any interest in debate >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, the statement "this statement cannot be proved" is >>>>>>>>> very interesting. It leads into major discussions about truth >>>>>>>>> outrunning provability. In fact, entire bodies of human and >>>>>>>>> mathematical philosphies are founded upon it. More shame on >>>>>>>>> you, eh. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> were concerned solely >>>>>>>>>> with dishing out abuse instead of arguing any kind of case. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here, choke on this, ----tard... focus the single, beady, >>>>>>>>> close-set eye that sits in the middle of your steeply sloping >>>>>>>>> forehead on the words 'Part 1 demonstrably shows that the self >>>>>>>>> is the notional equivalent of "this sentence is unprovable".' >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PART 1: You cannot prove that you are you >>>>>>>>> +=======================================+ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SLAP! >>>>>>>> Fingerprints and DNA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <------- WHAING GREAT BITCHTHWACK> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You didn't read it, did you, ----tard? Don't say you did, >>>>>>> because DNA was dealt with and dismissed, with fully verifiable >>>>>>> supporting argument, and to a level of proof acceptable in >>>>>>> courts of law. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You may now ---- right off and die, you dumb ----. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who said that? >>>>> >>>>> Who said what, ----nuts? >>>> >>>> There it is again!! >> >> >> >> >> Ah...seems to be all better now. I was getting worried. > > You should be worried. You seem to be hearing voices when you read > something. AAIIGGHHH!! This is freakin' me out. -- C'Pi "It's because of men like you that all must be destroyed." |
Re: The great lie that is evolution
"1" <1@home.com> wrote in message news:lM2uc.10655$%T.3453@okepread05...
> > Then counter argue, ----tard, otherwise you have nothing other than > > empty-minded blubberings. Nothing surprising there, really. > > > > > Nope- I just like hearing you squeal. > A little louder. Im almost there Where is the squealing in the stament you refer to? -- Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402 Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500 gentoo Linux kernel 2.6.5 <-- rolled my own |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:26 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands