Sign of Genius

So tell us, where is it then? I bet you don't say.

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

formatting link
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
Reply to
SJF
Loading thread data ...

So, no answer to the question, then? I'll repeat it for the casual observer, since you predictably snipped it in your reply:

"...please answer the question addressed in the referenced news article. I've been waiting for a reply to that post for some time now. Thank you.

"

Your silence speaks volumes; no psychobabble about "projecting" required.

Reply to
Charlie Siegrist

time.

--- At the heart of the bad treatment was Galileo's recalcitrance in recanting his support of Copernicus' heliocentric system.

In the end, though, the church broke him and he did recant, so their recent admission of guilt in treating him badly was tantamount to their accepting Copernicus's geocentric system as true.

---

--- Not true.

From:

formatting link

"Four hundred years after his execution, official expression of "profound sorrow" and acknowledgement of error at Bruno's condemnation to death was made, during the papacy of John Paul II."

JF

Reply to
John Fields

--
More hogwash.

JF
Reply to
John Fields

John Fields wrote

time.

Yes, but even those fools had managed to work out that the earth did indeed revolve around the sun LONG before that most recent admission of how badly Galileo had been treated.

Yes, but even those fools had managed to work out that the earth did indeed revolve around the sun LONG before that most recent admission of how badly Galileo had been treated.

Fraid so.

That wasnt when they fessed up to the fools they had made of themselves over Galileo.

Reply to
Rod Speed

Everything Bret knows is on that website.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote

Yes, of course!

I invite everyone to visit

formatting link
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.)

--
Stu Forrest
Reply to
SJF

He isn't smart enough to do that.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote >>

So what will he do?

1) Leave the site as it is and display nothing - for everyone to see and joke about,

2) Take down his site to try to show he is smart enough to do that but thereby implicitly admitting the site is rubbish,

3) Add extra content. Obviously not the original silly cartoon because he has already taken that off. Perhaps he will impress us with some hardware that he has designed, built and tested. After all, as he himself has said, it just needs a camera, though if he really wants to impress he could give their specifications. Then they can be examined and analysed and perhaps picked to pieces.

What will he do?

--
Stu Forrest
Reply to
SJF

With any luck, he will ESAD.

Reply to
Don Bowey

If the domain name is paid up and the server space is paid for it will likely sit there, devoid of any content.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Am I understanding properly that you suggested that they use an analog instrument to test error rates of a digital instrument?

Reply to
jjs

They wouldn't know a BER test from a Fireberd. ;-)

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you\'re crazy.
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

I bet that would make you happy.

Graham

Reply to
Eeyore

--
"Uncharacterustic", huh?

I like that, since it smacks of the city. :-)

 
JF
Reply to
John Fields

What is the wager?

Reply to
DB

John Fields wrote

wrong.

YOU made the original stupid claim.

YOU get to provide the evidence.

THATS how it works.

before that.

YOU made the original stupid claim.

YOU get to provide the evidence.

THATS how it works.

YOU made the original stupid claim.

YOU get to provide the evidence.

THATS how it works.

clear.

Corse it is.

Wrong, as always.

Reply to
Rod Speed

Dan Drake wrote

plain wrong.

clear.

it is?

Pathetic.

Irrelevant to what the word perjury means.

witnesses,

questioned

Different matter entirely to whether that qualifys as perjury.

Nope.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

the 1990s.

That fool Fields is clearly doing just that.

work undiluted in 1822,

They didnt get to ORDER a damned thing.

As I said, a separate matter entirely to when even those fools had realised that the earth did in fact revolve around the sun.

You cant even manage to grasp just what 'it' is actually being discussed.

You in spades when you cant even manage to work out just what is being discussed.

I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.

Pity its doesnt even comment on what is actually being discussed.

What part of PERJURY do you not understand ?

*believing* this crap?

Nope. I was JUST commenting there on whether what he said qualifys as PERJURY.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

Only for those with nothing viable between their ears.

Reply to
Rod Speed

Dan Drake wrote

plain wrong.

doubt,

very clear.

what it is?

witnesses,

questioned

till the 1990s.

Galileo's work undiluted in 1822,

discussed.

It isnt just ANY lying under oath.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

understand.

It isnt MY concept of perjury thats being discussed. Try a dictionary sometime.

Reply to
Rod Speed

understand.

--- I agree; it's your flagrant and evidently intentionally misconstrued conception of the meaning of perjury which is on trial.

Since you seem to disagree with the generally held concept of what perjury is, then it behooves you to expound on your concept of the meaning of perjury if you want to be a player.

Otherwise, all you're doing is sitting in the bleachers hurling obscenities without really being in the game at all.

---

---

Better yet, try this from:

formatting link
"From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [Laws in effect as of January 3, 2006] [CITE: 18USC1621]

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I--CRIMES CHAPTER 79--PERJURY Sec. 1621. Perjury generally

Whoever-- (1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;

is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States."

More simply put, I think, is that perjury is when one lies after one has sworn to tell what he believes to be the truth before an august body, which is exactly what Galileo was forced to do in order to save his life.

Do you think that he really rejected Copernicus and embraced Ptolomy after having seen the dance of the heavens in his own telescope?

JF

Reply to
John Fields

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.