On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 04:56:48 -0500, nightbat wrote:

nightbat wrote

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Hi Sam Viagra helps take the sag out. My wife worries more about her
sagging behind. Myself I'm a tit man and like when they stick straight
out. Very hard to find. Gravity moves them towards the center of the
Earth first. Bert

nightbat

Isn't that the underlining abstract mathematical theory basis
for your book friends string and M theory, imaginary invisible
underwires? Bert, this is not a sci fi forum, but a serious physics
International newsgroup community, composed of prominent, contributing,
and world renown scientists and researchers.

Your referencing to site link Sam Wormley about your wife's fear of loss
of tight buns, or your own preference for erect nipples is questionable
subject matter and not relative and for some inappropriate for such a
profound science newsgroup. You have already promised not to talk about
personal sexual practices or include self explicit orientations on these
net science newsgroups yet you can't apparently help yourself. Ok, we
know already of your wife's viagra spiking of your food and your posted
over infatuation with birthday suit out in space ship net group contact
alien Darla, and her tits. But please Bert, some of us are not into wild
spiked up sex, or thoughts of cosmic rumps with alien cuties. Science
posters, for the most part, are into profound science research concepts
and theories, TOE's, GUT's, gravity dynamics, universe understanding,
experiment proposals including their possible outcome evaluation, not
your posted three times a day sex rumps with your wife versus her
wanting you to cut the grass.

Ok, I acknowledge that original post subject question topic on
underwires was leading, and that's all you apparently need to get you
going, but please Bert, control yourself, if nothing else in the name of
science. You must always try to keep separate human deep sexual
instincts from deeper theoretical physics, astro concepts, and net group
science more pensive preoccupation's. Ha, ha, ha, by the way, I like
those Mother Nature perky, gravity defying, particular propensity
subject, female assets, myself.


the nightbat

The word is "romp", not "rump". Hopefully, you will digress from
commentary.

This is a perfect demonstration of the failure of modern science: the
failure to communicate ideas--however brilliant they may be--results in
those ideas being mothballed, and forgotten, needing to be rediscovered.

For example, your postulate: "some of us are not into wild
spiked up sex, or thoughts of cosmic rumps with alien cuties" (sic) is
entirely invalid and inspires me to think of pretty alien asses, NOT sex
with pretty aliens. As I am thinking of pretty alien asses, I entirely
forget the original premise: "some of us are not into wild
spiked up sex, or thoughts of cosmic romps with alien cuties", which may
may not be true.

These miscommunications are, in my opinion, the single greatest
stumbling-block in the advancement of science. If all science could be
reduced to terms a layman could understand, if no discoveries had to be
rediscovered, if no time and energy and money was wasted because of
misperception of that which has been understood (but poorly expressed) by
brilliant scientists, our planet would be benefitted greatly by good
science. In actual fact, bad science is killing our planet; if we don't
learn to communicate, and soon, our planet may soon be a dustball.

.sSweetMarie