| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
| Date: |
11 Jan 2005 06:20:03 PM |
| Object: |
Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
| User: "Jeff Findley" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 10:20:20 AM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
You're ignoring the work Jim has done in the past which included researching
and writing books about the Soviet space program. I've got one of these at
home and it's very good.
You're also ignoring the work he does for the TV networks and other media
outlets where he reports on current events in space (e.g. shuttle and ISS
stories).
It's the "we didn't land on the moon" kooks who keep dragging up the same
arguments that have been repeatedly refuted. For example, "Why aren't there
stars in the lunar photographs?". Anyone who knows anything about
photography knows why there aren't stars in the lunar photographs, which
were taken during the lunar day.
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 11:13:09 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
Jeff Findley wrote:
It's the "we didn't land on the moon" kooks who keep dragging up the same
arguments that have been repeatedly refuted.
Then why to you continue investing time refuting them?
Don't you have ... better things to do?
For example, "
[kookery snipped]
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kim Keller" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 10:44:17 PM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Jim spends his time doing way more than debunking kooks. He's a right fair
journalist, IMHO.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
I've read your posts. What grade of glass is your house made of?
-Kim-
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 03:55:19 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
Kim Keller wrote:
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Jim spends his time doing way more than debunking kooks.
But he has these kooky urges he has to satisfy, doesn't he?
He's a right fair journalist, IMHO.
Yes, he documents kooks. The kooks must be so grateful.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
I've read your posts.
I'm so flattered. This is the usenet, if you haven't noticed. What's your
excuse?
What grade of glass is your house made of?
Solid steel reinforced concrete. Hurricanes, you know.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kim Keller" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 06:22:39 AM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E4F39E.67C16FB1@everywhere.net...
January 12, 2005
But he has these kooky urges he has to satisfy, doesn't he?
Yes, he documents kooks. The kooks must be so grateful.
I'm so flattered. This is the usenet, if you haven't noticed. What's your
excuse?
gosh, you're witty. Caught a coconut with your head a few hurricanes back,
didn't you?
-Kim-
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Old Man" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 08:09:21 PM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz
No intelligent life anywhere ? Including Thomas Lee Elifritz ?
[Old Man]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 08:28:11 PM |
|
|
January 11, 2005
Old Man wrote:
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz
No intelligent life anywhere ?
That's what he claims.
Including Thomas Lee Elifritz ?
I make no claim regarding intelligence.
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
Hey Old Man! Titan! What's your prediction?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Old Man" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 10:17:39 PM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E48AD4.17788AB3@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
Old Man wrote:
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz
No intelligent life anywhere ?
That's what he claims.
Including Thomas Lee Elifritz ?
I make no claim regarding intelligence.
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of spaceships
onto
alien planets and moons.
Hey Old Man! Titan! What's your prediction?
Inquiring minds want to know.
The only known life is here, on Earth. For Titan,
photosynthesis (CO2 => C + O2) and respiration
(O2 + C => CO2) aren't very good bets.
However, Old Man isn't convinced by those who
say (really guess) that life is improbable. It didn't
take long on Earth. As soon as things cooled down
enough to permit stable molecules, life took-off.
The absorption spectra of several amino acids appear
in the light from distant stars. In general, Old Man
thinks (guesses) that life is a good bet most anywhere
that complex molecules can get together and stick
together for awhile.
[Old Man]
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Savard" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 07:55:13 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 02:28:11 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
<crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote, in part:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
That there certainly are intelligent aliens somewhere else in out vast
Universe does not mean that when someone says, "The aliens have landed
here", or "the aliens have landed there", we should hearken. The odds
still heavily favor it being nothing more than an Earthly scheme to
separate fools from their money.
If there ever is a signal in all the noise about putative alien contact,
it will out, with that most miraculous organ, recognition by the
established scientific community.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 08:41:00 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
John Savard wrote:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
That there certainly are intelligent aliens somewhere else in out vast
Universe does not mean that when someone says, "The aliens have landed
here", or "the aliens have landed there", we should hearken. The odds
still heavily favor it being nothing more than an Earthly scheme to
separate fools from their money.
You know that for sure, right, because you're a kook?
If there ever is a signal in all the noise about putative alien contact,
it will out, with that most miraculous organ, recognition by the
established scientific community.
Surely they can recognize technology billions of years more advanced than their
own!
You know that, because you're a kook, right?
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Phil Fraering pgf@AUTO" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
23 Jan 2005 10:16:33 AM |
|
|
jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid (John Savard) writes:
That there certainly are intelligent aliens somewhere else in out vast
Universe does not mean that when someone says, "The aliens have landed
here", or "the aliens have landed there", we should hearken. The odds
still heavily favor it being nothing more than an Earthly scheme to
separate fools from their money.
Or not.
I think everyone's missing a larger question:
Does it really matter if the aliens *have* landed here?
I mean, it's been demonstrated that white people do exist, but
building an airfield and waiting for the cargo to come isn't a
very productive way of spending your life.
Phil
.
|
|
|
| User: "DrPostman" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
23 Jan 2005 11:50:52 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 10:16:33 -0600, Phil Fraering <pgf@AUTO> in
accordance with The Prophecy scribed:
jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid (John Savard) writes:
That there certainly are intelligent aliens somewhere else in out vast
Universe does not mean that when someone says, "The aliens have landed
here", or "the aliens have landed there", we should hearken. The odds
still heavily favor it being nothing more than an Earthly scheme to
separate fools from their money.
Or not.
I think everyone's missing a larger question:
Does it really matter if the aliens *have* landed here?
I mean, it's been demonstrated that white people do exist, but
building an airfield and waiting for the cargo to come isn't a
very productive way of spending your life.
Phil
Nevertheless, the cargo cults thrived. The net seems full of them
today.
--
DrPostman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors, afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULTŪ #15-51506-253.
AFA-B Official Pollster & Hammer of Thor winner - August 2004
You can email me at: DrPostman(at)gmail.com
"Nothing compares to the complicated futility of ignorance."
-Kurt Vonnegut
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 10:03:37 PM |
|
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of
spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
Nice. Do you note with equal interest the number of successful
spaceflights? By what do you gauge that we rightfully ought to have a
higher success rate? Is interference by E.T. the only plausible reason
for spacecraft malfunctions? Two Venera's successfully landed upon
Venus. Five have similarly landed on Mars. Just about every major
planetary body in our solar system has been successfully visited by
spacecraft. I wouldn't call that a bad hair day.
-Mark Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 04:00:15 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
Mark Martin wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of
spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
Nice. Do you note with equal interest the number of successful
spaceflights?
Did you notice the word 'landing'?
By what do you gauge that we rightfully ought to have a
higher success rate?
I gauged nothing, it was a thought provoking comment.
Is interference by E.T. the only plausible reason
for spacecraft malfunctions?
Now what kind of kook would infer that from my statement?
Thank you so much for thinking.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 11:01:28 AM |
|
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
January 12, 2005
Mark Martin wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of
spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
Nice. Do you note with equal interest the number of successful
spaceflights?
Did you notice the word 'landing'?
Sure. That's why I cited a number of successful interplanetary
LANDINGS, on both Venus and Mars. This of course doesn't even count all
the successful landings on the Moon, and one asteroid.
By what do you gauge that we rightfully ought to have a
higher success rate?
I gauged nothing, it was a thought provoking comment.
*****. It's only thought provoking if you presume that the failure
rate is inexplicably high.
Is interference by E.T. the only plausible reason
for spacecraft malfunctions?
Now what kind of kook would infer that from my statement?
You're the one who harped about 'existence of E.T.' and 'failure rate'
all in one breath.
Thank you so much for thinking.
You're very welcome. If you ever need someone to think for you again,
just give a yell.
-Mark Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 12:02:36 PM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
qed100@hotmail.com wrote:
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
I do note with interest our regular crashing and landing of
spaceships onto
alien planets and moons.
Nice. Do you note with equal interest the number of successful
spaceflights?
Did you notice the word 'landing'?
Sure. That's why I cited a number of successful interplanetary
LANDINGS, on both Venus and Mars. This of course doesn't even count
all
the successful landings on the Moon, and one asteroid.
So how could you possibly misinterpret my statement
as only failures or only successes. Because you're kooky?
By what do you gauge that we rightfully ought to have a
higher success rate?
I gauged nothing, it was a thought provoking comment.
*****. It's only thought provoking if you presume that the failure
rate is inexplicably high.
I don't recall commenting on failure or success rates.
That's your kooky brain seeing things again.
Is interference by E.T. the only plausible reason
for spacecraft malfunctions?
Now what kind of kook would infer that from my statement?
You're the one who harped about 'existence of E.T.' and 'failure
rate'
all in one breath.
Please feel free where I used the term ET and failure rate in the same
sentence.
I'm coming up with some blanks :
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?as_q=ET+failure+rate&num=10&scoring=r&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=sci.*&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=%22Thomas+Lee+Elifritz%22&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=12&as_maxm=1&as_maxy=2005&safe=off
Thank you so much for thinking.
You're very welcome. If you ever need someone to think for you again,
just give a yell.
You don't seem to be thinking very clearly. Actually, you seem
to be overcome with hysteria and emotions when it comes to
kooky subjects.
My rational thoughts on my comment were more like :
Wow, if humans are regularly crashing and landing flying saucers
on alien moons and planets, I wonder what those hypothetical
superintelligent aliens beings are up to?
My comments made no claim of failure or success rates,
your kooky mind thought that up all by itself. Sorry.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 12:49:34 PM |
|
|
wrote:
My rational thoughts on my comment were more like :
Wow, if humans are regularly crashing and landing flying saucers
on alien moons and planets, I wonder what those hypothetical
superintelligent aliens beings are up to?
My comments made no claim of failure or success rates,
your kooky mind thought that up all by itself. Sorry.
Thou dost spew "kook" too much, me thinks. And your link is dead.
-Mark Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 01:48:56 PM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
qed100@hotmail.com wrote:
lifefo...@atlantic.net wrote:
My rational thoughts on my comment were more like :
Wow, if humans are regularly crashing and landing flying saucers
on alien moons and planets, I wonder what those hypothetical
superintelligent aliens beings are up to?
My comments made no claim of failure or success rates,
your kooky mind thought that up all by itself. Sorry.
Thou dost spew "kook" too much, me thinks.
You mean rationality, and objective open mindedness,
based upon evidence. Hey, that's the science in sci.*!
Amazing.
All I see from you guys is kookery, anti-kookery and hot air.
And your link is dead.
I'm so flattered you checked.
How many years was that website up?
Six, seven, eight years? Sigh.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Oberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
11 Jan 2005 09:04:12 PM |
|
|
Consider me a sort of 'cultural pathologist' who studies worms like you
to better understand how to develop effective vaccines.
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E46CCC.4421A602@everywhere.net...
January 11, 2005
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 04:07:28 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
Jim Oberg wrote:
Consider me a sort of 'cultural pathologist' who studies worms
Consider me a scientist who studies the evidence in order to develop better
theories and methods for space colonization and exploration.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff Findley" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 10:21:08 AM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E4F679.C8B5ED06@everywhere.net...
Consider me a scientist who studies the evidence in order to develop
better
theories and methods for space colonization and exploration.
Thanks for providing us with the "joke of the day". It was really funny.
;-)
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 11:14:37 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
Jeff Findley wrote:
Consider me a scientist who studies the evidence in order to develop
better
theories and methods for space colonization and exploration.
Thanks for providing us with the "joke of the day".
Feel free to provide us with links and references to your work.
Google News links don't count.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kim Keller" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 06:24:19 AM |
|
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote in message
news:41E4F679.C8B5ED06@everywhere.net...
Consider me a scientist who studies the evidence in order to develop
better
theories and methods for space colonization and exploration.
Request denied.
You're in luck, though - we do have an opening for a crackpot, and you fit
the requirements admirably.
-Kim-
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DrPostman" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 05:02:13 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:07:28 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
<crackpots@everywhere.net> in accordance with The Prophecy scribed:
January 12, 2005
Jim Oberg wrote:
Consider me a sort of 'cultural pathologist' who studies worms
Consider me a scientist who studies the evidence in order to develop better
theories and methods for space colonization and exploration.
Request denied.
--
DrPostman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors, afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULTŪ #15-51506-253.
AFA-B Official Pollster & Hammer of Thor winner - August 2004
You can email me at: DrPostman(at)gmail.com
"Nothing compares to the complicated futility of ignorance."
-Kurt Vonnegut
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DrPostman" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 05:01:52 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:04:12 GMT, "Jim Oberg"
<jameseoberg@houston.rr.com> in accordance with The Prophecy scribed:
Consider me a sort of 'cultural pathologist' who studies worms like you
to better understand how to develop effective vaccines.
I like the term "Kookologist".
--
DrPostman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors, afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULTŪ #15-51506-253.
AFA-B Official Pollster & Hammer of Thor winner - August 2004
You can email me at: DrPostman(at)gmail.com
"Nothing compares to the complicated futility of ignorance."
-Kurt Vonnegut
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Oberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 08:28:15 AM |
|
|
"DrPostman" <Looky@mysig.foremail> wrote
I like the term "Kookologist".
or kaka-ologist
.
|
|
|
| User: "DrPostman" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 06:20:57 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:28:15 GMT, "Jim Oberg"
<jameseoberg@houston.rr.com> in accordance with The Prophecy scribed:
"DrPostman" <Looky@mysig.foremail> wrote
I like the term "Kookologist".
or kaka-ologist
Even better.
--
DrPostman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors, afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULTŪ #15-51506-253.
AFA-B Official Pollster & Hammer of Thor winner - August 2004
You can email me at: DrPostman(at)gmail.com
"Nothing compares to the complicated futility of ignorance."
-Kurt Vonnegut
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Savard" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 07:50:25 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:20:03 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
<crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote, in part:
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
No.
The kooks are wrong.
And, of course, it serves a useful purpose to prevent kooks from fooling
*other* people who are just naive.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff Findley" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
14 Jan 2005 07:45:29 AM |
|
|
"John Savard" <jsavard@excxn.aNOSPAMb.cdn.invalid> wrote in message
news:41e52af6.1252671@news.ecn.ab.ca...
The kooks are wrong.
And, of course, it serves a useful purpose to prevent kooks from fooling
*other* people who are just naive.
And if you're not interested in what the kooks have to say, killfile them.
I understand Thomas Lee Elifritz likes it in killfile hell. ;-)
Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Jim Oberg - Anti-Kook |
12 Jan 2005 08:37:59 AM |
|
|
January 12, 2005
John Savard wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:20:03 GMT, Thomas Lee Elifritz
<crackpots@everywhere.net> wrote, in part:
We're talking about a guy here that has nothing better to do than spend
all his time trying to convince kooks that man really did walk on the
moon, and that there really is no intelligent life in the universe.
Identical to a kook in every way ...
No.
The kooks are wrong.
Yup, and the kooks and anti-kooks annihilate, and you get ... hot air.
No spaceships, no space colonization, nada, just heat.
How productive. Oops, here I am ...
Talking to a kook particle.
And, of course, it serves a useful purpose to prevent kooks from fooling
*other* people who are just naive.
Did it ever occur to your kooklike brain that if they are that naive, you
aren't going to fool them?
Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
