SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT



 Religions > Atheism > SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 6 of 7

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 

5

 

6

 

7

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "|-|erc"
Date: 07 Jan 2005 07:01:27 PM
Object: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT
I have made this claim perfectly clear for 3 years on sci.skeptic.
CLAIM : Anyone within hearing range of me will hear the Truman satelite
------- ------ -------- ----- - --- --- ------ -- ------ -------
The Truman satelite is targetted on me because I am supernatural.
Every day people say to me "I saw the Truman" and "I saw God".
INSTANT PROOF OF PARANORMAL to any skeptic investigator
who can come to Townsville, Queensland, Australia for 1 minute.
Herc
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dksqpv41597ofbhr16mi7tdj2qfihvoldv%404ax.com
Hey Trueman...
what up, my uncle told me you post here... he's did some audio on your
secret show and gave me some tapes. love the show.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1epmdv8iqmnckeqhctnf17537rt8hevjeh%404ax.com
You rule Truman.
http://www.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=9aqbbv85c53jobkenltkil2tbsdk7m2n3p@4ax.com
I was in Townsville over the weekend, and I heard him.
Very spooky!
http://www.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=me7hbv4snqc6gnb1cktj3cvqtiibnpm6s9@4ax.com
I'm from Townsville and YOU ARE the Truman
http://www.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=3eb66422.779705967@news.ozemail.com.au
I'm in Townsville. We're sick of you
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.OSF.4.21.0309230859190.5384-100000%40marlin.jcu.edu.au

Do you know if the truman is living in Townsville?

I've been hearing stuff, yeah.
From: Les Norton (Les.Norton@spamfree.com.au)
Subject: OT: RESULTS: Herc-Truman test
BTW, when I was in The Strand last weekend, I didn't hear your broadcast per
se. Well, at least I thought I didn't. I think you're the Truman too.
"Therefore 100,000 Townsville residents and 1 Melbourne tourist can't be
wrong".
****************************************************************
Les just went to Townsville, didn't come nearby but heard people there talk about me
Here is Les approaching me on usenet, calls me ADAM then tells me about
the real Truman having a crush on Laurie Holden, (he tested if I knew that).
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=s1w1c.85795%24Wa.33069%40news-server.bigpond.net.au
From: Les Norton (Les.Norton@spamfree.com.au)
Subject: Re: Herc- please explain..
Date: 2004-03-03 17:56:44 PST
No worries, Adam.
AUSTRALIA SKEPTICS CANCELLED THE PARANORMAL CHALLENGE
BECAUSE THE CEO ASKED DETAILS ABOUT THE TEST AND I SAID
IT WORKS BECAUSE I'M ADAM.
THAT WAS PROOF TO HIM THAT MY CLAIM WAS A DELUSION
THEY MAKE PUBLIC OFFERS TO PARNORMAL CLAIMANTS
BUT YOU HAVE TO BE AN *ORDINARY* PARANORMAL PERSON.
THEN THEY LIED THAT MY CLAIMS WERE INCOHERENT, THEY
WERE VERY BASIC. THEN THEY DID A NEWS REPORT SAYING
THEY MUST BE DETAILED AND SPECIFIC, THIS IS A LIE, CHECK
THE CONDITIONS OF APPLICATION
--
what do women say about male sperm? sex cells never age? protein rich?
:-C==8 You'll never never know if you never never blow! :-C==8
.

User: "Cardinal Chunder"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 06:46:23 AM
|-|erc wrote:

I am The Truman of Jim Carrey fame. Please help stop me being tortured since April 2002
with constant microwave laser from the Truman satelite splitting my head and tormenting me
and people around me. Not a prank, I am not crazy, The Truman Show made you think that
---------------------------------------------s-o-s-----------------------------------------
"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in message news:cs0br702tsj@news3.newsguy.com...

|-|erc wrote:

I'm here in Townsville, I hear 10 people a day say to my face "wow I saw the Truman".


I'm sure with ten people saying it to your face everyday you'll easily
be able to supply evidence that they are. And I'm not referring to those
posts you occasionally drag out where the pisstaking makes a tangible
whoosh sound as it flies over your head.

Here's how:

1. Borrow / buy a cheap cassette recorder
2. Tape these people saying you are the Truman
3. Digitize it into the computer via a microphone jack or built-in mic
4. Put it up on a website.



that's a good point. My PC is not even a pentium and no sound card,
you can check the post headers I"m running win95, not even win95B.

More excuses.

So I"m looking at a new PC that's all. I make money now so after I get
a scooter next month, maybe April May a new PC.

I CAN TAPE THEM SURE. IF usenet was voice driven we wouldn't have
this problem of saying what people say they hear.

Big deal, buy a sound card. A cheap VGA card could be picked up for
practically nothing from anywhere - a surplus store, charity shop,
jumble sale or whatever. Or walk into an internet cafe and digitize it
there, or borrow a friends PC.

There are more hi-tech solutions but I chose one that might be
affordable to someone on welfare.

I'm fully expecting you to post no evidence at all or something as
equally pathetic as you've supplied thus far.



I can make a 24 hour radio station of the CIA torture interrogators and my thoughts,
but you'll just say its 20 low paid actors.

Well tell you what, you tape your 24 radio station of CIA torture
interrogators, web it up and we'll have something concrete to examine.

You're there, you're not bothering to communicate with anyone here.


Fly all the way to Australia to meet a paranoid schizophrenic? Ring up
people at random and engage in a nonsense babble conversation? I'd have
to be as crazy as you to do either.


Gee can you come up with another idea? do you know someone who might
be closer? maybe on the internet?

Sure I do. I know a number of people by reputation fron Australia, one
of whom is on this thread. They're no more inclined to believe your
fantasies than I am. I'm the same goes in fact for most of the denizens
of the various aus.* groups that you inflict your fantasies on.

ERGO... you have no idea. You can ASSUME I am just an ordinary man.


I can assume it since it's so.


nope, not in sci.skeptic

Yes it is, anywhere.


Its a safe bet too, 99.99% of skeptics are right. Just say "no".

You can't know that I am the Truman by sitting at your computer. You haven't
made it explicit that you've done anything but. therefore you are a just a wanker.
QED


And I can't know that all matter beyond the event horizon is fact
comprised of delicious strawberry cheesecake. Or that there is a 10,000
foot tall neon elephant hiding behind me that no one can see or touch.
But I would have to be demented to believe such things.

You're just pissed that no one will pander to your equally ludicrous
delusions. And the reason is simple. You're mentally ill but you haven't
the balls to admit it.

<rest of drivel snipped>


yada yada, once the QED is written after proof you are a wanker who can't get
off his computer chair its irrefutable. no assumption needed.

Herc

First off it's for you to supply evidence supporting your ludicrous
claim, something you have singularly not done for the 2 or 3 years you
have been bleating about it. Secondly as you already know, it is
impossible to disprove something which is unfalsiable.
If you claim the CIA are targetting you, supply the proof. If you claim
everyone acknowledges you are the "Truman" supply the proof, etc.
In the absence of any evidence and plenty to support a more obvious
explanation it far more likely (to the point of absolute certainty) that
you are mentally ill.
Sadly for you, your delusion is so ingrained that you totally incapable
of facing reality. That's too bad for you, but it doesn't alter the fact.
Take the meds Herc. Really.
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 07:26:47 AM
"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in


I CAN TAPE THEM SURE. IF usenet was voice driven we wouldn't have
this problem of saying what people say they hear.


Big deal, buy a sound card. A cheap VGA card could be picked up for
practically nothing from anywhere - a surplus store, charity shop,
jumble sale or whatever. Or walk into an internet cafe and digitize it
there, or borrow a friends PC.

for a 8 year old computer? chance of working 25%


There are more hi-tech solutions but I chose one that might be
affordable to someone on welfare.

I'm fully expecting you to post no evidence at all or something as
equally pathetic as you've supplied thus far.



I can make a 24 hour radio station of the CIA torture interrogators and my thoughts,
but you'll just say its 20 low paid actors.


Well tell you what, you tape your 24 radio station of CIA torture
interrogators, web it up and we'll have something concrete to examine.

the term 24/7 doesn't mean much to you does it?


You're there, you're not bothering to communicate with anyone here.


Fly all the way to Australia to meet a paranoid schizophrenic? Ring up
people at random and engage in a nonsense babble conversation? I'd have
to be as crazy as you to do either.


Gee can you come up with another idea? do you know someone who might
be closer? maybe on the internet?


Sure I do. I know a number of people by reputation fron Australia, one
of whom is on this thread. They're no more inclined to believe your
fantasies than I am. I'm the same goes in fact for most of the denizens
of the various aus.* groups that you inflict your fantasies on.

stop talking live a pervert


ERGO... you have no idea. You can ASSUME I am just an ordinary man.


I can assume it since it's so.


nope, not in sci.skeptic


Yes it is, anywhere.

not when the major topic is prove paranormal,
you DO assume claimants are wrong, that is why you are NOT a scientist
and very far from it.



Its a safe bet too, 99.99% of skeptics are right. Just say "no".

You can't know that I am the Truman by sitting at your computer. You haven't
made it explicit that you've done anything but. therefore you are a just a wanker.
QED


And I can't know that all matter beyond the event horizon is fact
comprised of delicious strawberry cheesecake. Or that there is a 10,000
foot tall neon elephant hiding behind me that no one can see or touch.
But I would have to be demented to believe such things.

You're just pissed that no one will pander to your equally ludicrous
delusions. And the reason is simple. You're mentally ill but you haven't
the balls to admit it.

<rest of drivel snipped>


yada yada, once the QED is written after proof you are a wanker who can't get
off his computer chair its irrefutable. no assumption needed.

Herc


First off it's for you to supply evidence supporting your ludicrous
claim, something you have singularly not done for the 2 or 3 years you
have been bleating about it. Secondly as you already know, it is
impossible to disprove something which is unfalsiable.

no. paranormal is already defined as 1 in 5,000,000,000 specific ability to one person.
(or whatever).
there is no need to be assholes about it calling every paranoraml claim LUDICROUS.
that's what it means dumbo. stop being a gang of fuckheads
YOU support the invitation to WORK WITH PARANORMAL CLAIMANTS
The only way skeptics are worth anything is to WORK WITH THE CLAIMANT
YOU ALL FAIL.. YOU didn't work that part out, some scientists 50 years
ago worked that out! Not you! 1st generation makes it, 2nd generation saves it,
3rd generation spends it. You're out of pocket.
for the skeptic effect to dissapear ONE OF YOU has to work with ONE OF US.
There's no DELUDED
There's no LUDICROUS
There's no LIAR
There's no YOU CANT
There's no YOU HAVE TO "UPLOAD EVIDENCE'
that's an oxymoron, no sequence of words or pictures proves paranormal.
Now We expect to be treated civilly.
BOWDITCH said I can have a motel room where I want for as long as it takes
with every thing catered and every wish granted, in exchange for me demoing powers.
I expect no less.
Maybe A.S.S. and RANDI don't have as much money as they flaunt,
maybe they should cut 5% of the prize each year toward the tests,
transport, accomodation, equipment, personell.
BUT THEY DONT. I didn't get a frequent flockers card at Madame Heloises
house of eternal flockers, I got a cell for 6 months because you refuse people
on their claim, instead of allowing things to progress and get some DATA.


If you claim the CIA are targetting you, supply the proof. If you claim
everyone acknowledges you are the "Truman" supply the proof, etc.

In the absence of any evidence and plenty to support a more obvious
explanation it far more likely (to the point of absolute certainty) that
you are mentally ill.

Sadly for you, your delusion is so ingrained that you totally incapable
of facing reality. That's too bad for you, but it doesn't alter the fact.

Take the meds Herc. Really.

I absolutedly hate people who say that, desist. Act humane.
Herc
.
User: "Cardinal Chunder"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 08:30:16 AM
|-|erc wrote:

"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in

I CAN TAPE THEM SURE. IF usenet was voice driven we wouldn't have
this problem of saying what people say they hear.


Big deal, buy a sound card. A cheap VGA card could be picked up for
practically nothing from anywhere - a surplus store, charity shop,
jumble sale or whatever. Or walk into an internet cafe and digitize it
there, or borrow a friends PC.



for a 8 year old computer? chance of working 25%

More excuses.

There are more hi-tech solutions but I chose one that might be
affordable to someone on welfare.

I'm fully expecting you to post no evidence at all or something as
equally pathetic as you've supplied thus far.



I can make a 24 hour radio station of the CIA torture interrogators and my thoughts,
but you'll just say its 20 low paid actors.


Well tell you what, you tape your 24 radio station of CIA torture
interrogators, web it up and we'll have something concrete to examine.


the term 24/7 doesn't mean much to you does it?

Sure it does. It means that you can turn the tape recorder on at any
time and have plenty of content to present.
So yet more excuses.

You're there, you're not bothering to communicate with anyone here.


Fly all the way to Australia to meet a paranoid schizophrenic? Ring up
people at random and engage in a nonsense babble conversation? I'd have
to be as crazy as you to do either.


Gee can you come up with another idea? do you know someone who might
be closer? maybe on the internet?


Sure I do. I know a number of people by reputation fron Australia, one
of whom is on this thread. They're no more inclined to believe your
fantasies than I am. I'm the same goes in fact for most of the denizens
of the various aus.* groups that you inflict your fantasies on.


stop talking live a pervert

What kind of pervert would that be? One who stalks women?

ERGO... you have no idea. You can ASSUME I am just an ordinary man.


I can assume it since it's so.


nope, not in sci.skeptic


Yes it is, anywhere.


not when the major topic is prove paranormal,

I don't have to prove anything. You are the one making the fantastic
claim and you've failed miserably to supply any tangible evidence.

you DO assume claimants are wrong, that is why you are NOT a scientist
and very far from it.

What I assume is neither here nor there. Supply some evidence and let it
stand or fall on its own merits.

Its a safe bet too, 99.99% of skeptics are right. Just say "no".

You can't know that I am the Truman by sitting at your computer. You haven't
made it explicit that you've done anything but. therefore you are a just a wanker.
QED


And I can't know that all matter beyond the event horizon is fact
comprised of delicious strawberry cheesecake. Or that there is a 10,000
foot tall neon elephant hiding behind me that no one can see or touch.
But I would have to be demented to believe such things.

You're just pissed that no one will pander to your equally ludicrous
delusions. And the reason is simple. You're mentally ill but you haven't
the balls to admit it.

<rest of drivel snipped>


yada yada, once the QED is written after proof you are a wanker who can't get
off his computer chair its irrefutable. no assumption needed.

Herc


First off it's for you to supply evidence supporting your ludicrous
claim, something you have singularly not done for the 2 or 3 years you
have been bleating about it. Secondly as you already know, it is
impossible to disprove something which is unfalsiable.



no. paranormal is already defined as 1 in 5,000,000,000 specific ability to one person.
(or whatever).

Defined by who?

there is no need to be assholes about it calling every paranoraml claim LUDICROUS.

But your claim is ludicrous. If you hate that moniker, how about
supplying some evidence?

that's what it means dumbo. stop being a gang of fuckheads

YOU support the invitation to WORK WITH PARANORMAL CLAIMANTS

Plenty of people have tried to work with you for all the good it did them.

The only way skeptics are worth anything is to WORK WITH THE CLAIMANT

YOU ALL FAIL.. YOU didn't work that part out, some scientists 50 years
ago worked that out! Not you! 1st generation makes it, 2nd generation saves it,
3rd generation spends it. You're out of pocket.


for the skeptic effect to dissapear ONE OF YOU has to work with ONE OF US.

There's no DELUDED
There's no LUDICROUS
There's no LIAR
There's no YOU CANT
There's no YOU HAVE TO "UPLOAD EVIDENCE'

that's an oxymoron, no sequence of words or pictures proves paranormal.


Now We expect to be treated civilly.

Yeah sure. Civility only stretches so far and tends to wear thin when
confronted with threats to poison food.

BOWDITCH said I can have a motel room where I want for as long as it takes
with every thing catered and every wish granted, in exchange for me demoing powers.

I expect no less.


Maybe A.S.S. and RANDI don't have as much money as they flaunt,
maybe they should cut 5% of the prize each year toward the tests,
transport, accomodation, equipment, personell.

It's funny, but it's your claim and if you're so convinced that you can
demonstrate it, what's a few quid upfront on travel compared to the
prize money you're certain to win after?
Why the hell do you think they should pay so you can have a free holiday?

BUT THEY DONT. I didn't get a frequent flockers card at Madame Heloises
house of eternal flockers, I got a cell for 6 months because you refuse people
on their claim, instead of allowing things to progress and get some DATA.

Actually you get a cell for making threats that can reasonably
interpretted as extortion. If it bothers you that much, perhaps you
shouldn't have said it. The same for the rest of your threats.

If you claim the CIA are targetting you, supply the proof. If you claim
everyone acknowledges you are the "Truman" supply the proof, etc.

In the absence of any evidence and plenty to support a more obvious
explanation it far more likely (to the point of absolute certainty) that
you are mentally ill.

Sadly for you, your delusion is so ingrained that you totally incapable
of facing reality. That's too bad for you, but it doesn't alter the fact.

Take the meds Herc. Really.



I absolutedly hate people who say that, desist. Act humane.

Herc

Why do you hate people who are offering you the only advice that stands
a chance to work?
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 11 Jan 2005 08:13:30 PM
completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal claims stupid
in a skeptic forum
do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"
Herc
.
User: "Chris Krolczyk"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 12 Jan 2005 07:20:05 PM
|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal

claims stupid

in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"

Yes. Do you know what "attributions" are, nutcase? Or "quotes"?
Chris Krolczyk
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 12 Jan 2005 08:06:26 PM
--------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Chris Krolczyk" <chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com> wrote in ...


|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal

claims stupid

in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"


Yes. Do you know what "attributions" are, nutcase? Or "quotes"?
Chris Krolczyk

your primary school level skills astound me
Herc
.
User: "Chris Krolczyk"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 18 Jan 2005 07:16:18 PM
|-|erc wrote:


--------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------

"Chris Krolczyk" <chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com> wrote in ...


|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal

claims stupid

in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"


Yes. Do you know what "attributions" are, nutcase? Or "quotes"?
Chris Krolczyk


your primary school level skills astound me

I've been remiss in repying in a timely fashion,
but...
*You* can't be bothered to read attributions
properly and then say *I'm* on the level of a
primary school graduate?
My, but you're dense. In addition to all your
other massive problems, of course.
-Chris Krolczyk
.



User: "Cardinal Chunder"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 03:50:54 AM
|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal claims stupid
in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"

Herc

So I take it you're not going to perform the mind numbingly simple task
of taping these supposed acknowledgements or 24 hour CIA radio station
and webbing them up?
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 04:43:04 AM
-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in

|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal claims stupid
in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"

Herc


So I take it you're not going to perform the mind numbingly simple task
of taping these supposed acknowledgements or 24 hour CIA radio station
and webbing them up?

1st the moped, then the new computer
Herc
--
No act is more patriotic than speaking out when your government
is doing the wrong thing in your name. This is not your right
but your sacred duty. And none are more treasonous than those
who would silence these voices.
.
User: "Wally Anglesea"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 14 Jan 2005 01:32:29 AM
|-|erc wrote:

-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in

|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal claims stupid
in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"

Herc


So I take it you're not going to perform the mind numbingly simple task
of taping these supposed acknowledgements or 24 hour CIA radio station
and webbing them up?



1st the moped, then the new computer

So you can't afford a new puter, and you complain about it, yet you
refuse to use your psychic powers to win the lottery because "there's
not enough money in it"?
Anyone else see this as more evidence of the depth of Hercs delusion?
.

User: "Cardinal Chunder"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 06:50:06 AM
|-|erc wrote:

-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Cardinal Chunder" <cc@foo.no.spam.xyzabcfghllaa.com> wrote in

|-|erc wrote:

completely lost on this moron... go ahead keep calling paranormal claims stupid
in a skeptic forum

do you know the difference between "skeptical" and "ignorant"

Herc


So I take it you're not going to perform the mind numbingly simple task
of taping these supposed acknowledgements or 24 hour CIA radio station
and webbing them up?



1st the moped, then the new computer
Herc

Yeah keep those excuses coming.
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 05:09:48 PM


Yeah keep those excuses coming.

what a fuckwit.
Herc
.
User: "raven1"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 06:01:04 PM
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:09:48 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:



Yeah keep those excuses coming.


what a fuckwit.

You're the fuckwit if you keep putting forth the same nonsensical
claims and then go to great lengths to avoid presenting any evidence
to back them up, yet still expect people to believe them.
.
User: "Rev. Karl E. Taylor"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 06:23:29 PM
raven1 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:09:48 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:


Yeah keep those excuses coming.


what a fuckwit.



You're the fuckwit if you keep putting forth the same nonsensical
claims and then go to great lengths to avoid presenting any evidence
to back them up, yet still expect people to believe them.

But is that not the hallmark of fruit loops everywhere?
Little children running around, stamping there little feet, screaming at
the top of their little lungs, "PAY ATTENTION TO ME!"
Maybe if we are really lucky, this Herc idiot will get so *****,
he'll hold his breath for us.
--
There are none more ignorant and useless,
than they that seek answers on their knees,
with their eyes closed.
____________________________________________________________________
Rev. Karl E. Taylor

A.A #1143 PLONKED by Bob
Apostle of Dr. Lao EAC: Virgin Conversion Unit Director
____________________________________________________________________
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 13 Jan 2005 06:50:22 PM
-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote in ...

raven1 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:09:48 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:


Yeah keep those excuses coming.


what a fuckwit.



You're the fuckwit if you keep putting forth the same nonsensical
claims and then go to great lengths to avoid presenting any evidence
to back them up, yet still expect people to believe them.

But is that not the hallmark of fruit loops everywhere?

Little children running around, stamping there little feet, screaming at
the top of their little lungs, "PAY ATTENTION TO ME!"

Maybe if we are really lucky, this Herc idiot will get so *****,
he'll hold his breath for us.

just hold your breath, I'll have audio uploaded soon enough. would you spend
$150 on sound equipment for a run down 686? or get a P1000 with audio for $500?
Herc
.
User: "Wally Anglesea"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT just ask Chunder 14 Jan 2005 01:33:19 AM
|-|erc wrote:

-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktayloraz@getnet.net> wrote in ...

raven1 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:09:48 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:



Yeah keep those excuses coming.


what a fuckwit.



You're the fuckwit if you keep putting forth the same nonsensical
claims and then go to great lengths to avoid presenting any evidence
to back them up, yet still expect people to believe them.



But is that not the hallmark of fruit loops everywhere?

Little children running around, stamping there little feet, screaming at
the top of their little lungs, "PAY ATTENTION TO ME!"

Maybe if we are really lucky, this Herc idiot will get so *****,
he'll hold his breath for us.



just hold your breath, I'll have audio uploaded soon enough. would you spend
$150 on sound equipment for a run down 686? or get a P1000 with audio for $500?

Go and win the lottery with your super psychic powers.
.











User: "Cardinal Chunder"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 07:25:40 AM
Cardinal Chunder wrote:

Big deal, buy a sound card. A cheap VGA card could be picked up for

My bad, ISA card - VGA is video card.
.
User: "Little Me"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 08:35:35 AM
I'm not ignorant!
Why just yesterday I bumped into an old lady and I said sorry straight away!
Pah, talk about tar and the same brush!
PS: (no sarcasm this time) Stoney and you other 2, this NG is great with you
in it, dont go! :-)
.



User: "raven1"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 10 Jan 2005 10:52:35 PM
On 11 Jan 2005 04:18:21 GMT, Gary Bohn
<garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> wrote:

Sorry to butt in Michelle, but where do these fruitcakes come from? T.o.
has kooks, but usually they make a little sense.

Methinks the "a" between "make" and "little" could have been
omitted...
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 10 Jan 2005 11:22:44 PM
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in

Sorry to butt in Michelle, but where do these fruitcakes come from? T.o.
has kooks, but usually they make a little sense.


Methinks the "a" between "make" and "little" could have been
omitted...

exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete sense.
<don't expect Raven to follow the flow on that one>
Herc
.
User: "raven1"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 02:33:05 PM
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:22:44 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:


"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in

Sorry to butt in Michelle, but where do these fruitcakes come from? T.o.
has kooks, but usually they make a little sense.


Methinks the "a" between "make" and "little" could have been
omitted...


exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete sense.


<don't expect Raven to follow the flow on that one>

I do. You do realize that you're admitting to being a kook, right?
.
User: "Gary Bohn"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 03:45:56 PM
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:01p8u098cj0fvou3veu2ob5qcllccp4pqv@4ax.com:

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:22:44 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:


"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in

Sorry to butt in Michelle, but where do these fruitcakes come from?
T.o. has kooks, but usually they make a little sense.


Methinks the "a" between "make" and "little" could have been
omitted...


exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete
sense.


<don't expect Raven to follow the flow on that one>


I do. You do realize that you're admitting to being a kook, right?



I don't follow it. Somebody 'splain it to me.
--
apatriot #23, aa #1779, Grand Poobah (Pubbah)(Hell! head honcho), EAC
Department of Oxygen Deprivation Responsible for brain damage
everywhere!
Gary Bohn
Conservatism is the political philosophy that it ain't broke so don't
try to fix it. Therefore, if that is indeed how it is, that is what
ought to be.
The Wilkins
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 08:10:04 PM
---------------------------------------------s-o-s-----------------------------------------
"Gary Bohn" <garybohn@REMOVETHISaccesscomm.ca> wrote in message

Sorry to butt in Michelle, but where do these fruitcakes come from?
T.o. has kooks, but usually they make a little sense.

meaning "herc makes NO sense"


Methinks the "a" between "make" and "little" could have been
omitted...

meaning (accidently) "that should be kooks make little sense"
meaning (but wont admit he wrote it) "herc makes complete sense"



exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete
sense.


<don't expect Raven to follow the flow on that one>


I do. You do realize that you're admitting to being a kook, right?

standard copout claiming what he says is taken for granted
..




I don't follow it. Somebody 'splain it to me.

Kookhunters don't follow their own "sense"
Herc
.
User: "raven1"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 08:32:17 PM
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:10:04 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:
"exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete
sense."
Which implies that you're rating yourself as a kook who makes complete
sense...
.
User: "Danny Kodicek"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 08:50:13 PM
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:vfd9u0h8k6p1ioi6vrp87brv7guseibrhn@4ax.com...

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:10:04 +1000, "|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote:


"exactly, usually kooks make little sense, but Herc makes complete
sense."

Which implies that you're rating yourself as a kook who makes complete
sense...

If one kook always makes complete sense and another always makes no sense
but you don't know which, and you meet them at a crossroads, what question
do you ask them fo find out the way to Kook Central?
Danny
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 09:45:13 PM

If one kook always makes complete sense and another always makes no sense
but you don't know which, and you meet them at a crossroads, what question
do you ask them fo find out the way to Kook Central?

Danny


Your transformation is complete.
Herc
From: Danny Kodicek (dragon@well-spring.co.uk)
Subject: The words 'troll' and 'kook'
View this article only
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Date: 2003-04-12 11:27:34 PST
Could I make a plea to all sensible people on this newsgroup never to use
either of these words any more? It just seems to encourage them - and soon
you get everyone calling everyone the same thing.
I've been as guilty as the next kook, of course.
Danny
.
User: "Danny Kodicek"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 09:53:19 PM
"|-|erc" <h@r.c> wrote in message news:34jkpbF4bcf49U1@individual.net...

If one kook always makes complete sense and another always makes no

sense

but you don't know which, and you meet them at a crossroads, what

question

do you ask them fo find out the way to Kook Central?

Danny



Your transformation is complete.

Is it not blindingly obvious that this is a joke?
Danny
.
User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 11 Jan 2005 10:39:49 PM

do you ask them fo find out the way to Kook Central?

Danny

Your transformation is complete.


Is it not blindingly obvious that this is a joke?

Danny

Subject: The words 'troll' and 'kook'
View this article only
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Date: 2003-04-12 11:27:34 PST
Could I make a plea to all sensible people on this newsgroup never to use
either of these words any more
You said it!
Herc
.










User: "|-|erc"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 10 Jan 2005 08:44:15 PM
I am The Truman of Jim Carrey fame. Please help stop me being tortured since April 2002
with constant microwave laser from the Truman satelite splitting my head and tormenting me
and people around me. Not a prank, I am not crazy, The Truman Show made you think that
---------------------------------------------s-o-s-----------------------------------------
"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in ...


"Chris Krolczyk" <chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com> wrote in message> >

|-|erc wrote:

I have made this claim perfectly clear for 3 years on sci.skeptic.


Yes, you have made your claim to kookhood perfectly clear on
sci.skeptic
for three years. What of it?


And, in alt.atheism.


another a.a. slag I remember.
how do you get these women raving off their heads, she's abusing me 20 posts every go
on the one thread, then she says "REPLY TO A MORON".
I replied "I just did", never heard from her again.
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,370 for michelle malkin moron
Herc
.
User: "Chris Krolczyk"

Title: Re: SKEPTICS ARE IGNORANT 12 Jan 2005 07:02:59 PM
|-|erc wrote:

"Michelle Malkin" <hypatiab7@comcast.net> wrote in ...


"Chris Krolczyk" <chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com> wrote in message> >

|-|erc wrote:

I have made this claim perfectly clear for 3 years on

sci.skeptic.


Yes, you have made your claim to kookhood perfectly clear on
sci.skeptic
for three years. What of it?


And, in alt.atheism.



another a.a. slag I remember.

Whoooooo! Gold star to the kook with actual memory
retention! He can actually *remember people who
respond to his posts*! Imagine that.

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,370 for michelle malkin moron

You actually think that a high match number on google actually
counts for something wrt the quality of your arguments, don't
you?
It's perfectly obvious that you're already quite nuts,
Herc; adding the prize "thick little git" won't help.
Chris Krolczyk
.



  Page 6 of 7

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 

5

 

6

 

7

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3805     pg.2113     pg.1173     pg.651     pg.361     pg.200     pg.111     pg.62     pg.35     pg.20     pg.12     pg.8     pg.6     pg.4     pg.2

OLDER