Usenet.com

www.Usenet.com

Group Index

Talk Thread Archive from Usenet.com

<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->

Re: PEARL ADMITS IT THE LIST IS CORRECT!!!



usual suspect wrote:
farrell77 wrote:

Yes, 26 for 26 is pretty fucking solid, if I say so myself.


Not if it's grossly inaccurate.


It isn't grossly inaccurate. ...


That's yet for you to show.  I just posted my analysis of
your defense for the list.


Jonathan has kindly responded. Those "rants" you deride are based on some very longstanding admissions. See also Lesley's own replies about each matter. Do you honestly think I'd make up crap about inner earth beings? When asked about it, she offered "proof" (haha!):

pearl> http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
pearl> A freak effect of sunlight on the lens, of course.  <s>

[...]

Yes, as usual. He did say he was leaving or something. ...


Not "or something".


You only said you'd be gone, putz. You didn't say where you were going,
how long you'd be gone, etc. ...


I said I wouldn't be back until late last week.


Oh, okay then (lol).

...I didn't ask. I did note that the list
would be documented that weekend regardless. I kept my word.


I travel frequently on business.


That's awfully special.


When I'm on
the road, I seldom have many opportunities to follow newsgroups.


So?


When I return, there's usually a huge stack of action items to catch up
on at work and home.  So my posting is necessarily somewhat
irregular.  If you have a problem with that, too bad for you.


*I* didn't have a problem with it until you decided to post this big
rant about it. ...


It wasn't a rant.  I just supplied some info in response to
Jon's claim that I had whiffed off.  If you don't care about
it, fine.  No need to go off the deep end.

You're weird.


Oh yeah? Who's defending someone who believes in inner earth beings and is agnostic on the subject of leprechauns? I may be weird, but that only makes you weirdER.

[...]

...I lived up to my end of the bargain. I showed that all
but a couple of those points are accurate. While you were gone, she
treated us to her own apologia for her weird beliefs. Please read her
posts and see where -- and how little -- she actually objects to any of
the valid points.


...I'll be here to
rub his face in it when he returns.


In what?


In the truth, which you questioned.


In the list I asked you to defend.


It's done, Bob.

I ask for you to defend *your* list and you can't
handle that simple request.  Tough.


I did. Look at her response: she documented her crummy beliefs with
other links; she only took exception to a couple points. How do you like
your crow, Bob?


Okay she took exception to two points?  Are those the same two
that Jon called fanciful?  If so, then by your count, you're at 23 of
26?


One is corrected. I also don't believe her about the part involving her marriage; should that ever need correction, I stand ready to replace it with other silly beliefs (like her use the other day of a source which sells books like "How to Find a Psychic"). As difficult as it is for me to take the word of a skinhead (her ex), it's easier than taking the word of someone so naive and gullible that she posts crap about inner earth beings and the Zapper. Keep on defending her, Bob. It's very amusing.

It's also exemplary of the only thing he does here. Sophist Boob Black does not attempt to defend so-called "ethical" vegetarianism, or any of the tenets that lead to it. He contents himself merely with pretending to be the champion of "aras".





<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->


Usenet.com



Please check out one of the premium Usenet Newsgroup Service Providers below for access to Usenet.