Re: Jason's Dilemma
- From: "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Aug 2005 14:20:00 -0700
Jim McGinn wrote:
> IOW, Jason, herein you've produced an incredibly lame
> excuse for pretending to ignore my hypothesis. If I was
> to concentrate my efforts to a journal (let's say JHE)
> I'd get similar lame excuses but the difference would be
> that these excuses would not be as public as they are
> here in this NG and so it would be more difficult to
> expose the purely political nature of of your responses.
OK, that's the lamest excuse I've ever heard for being too cowardly to
try to publish. You already know ahead of time that it will be
rejected and you are ahead of time putting forth the rationalization
that it's someone else's fault. Sounds like complete quackery. I hope
you get great entertainment from pretending to have it all figured out
because your behavior makes certain that you will remain utterly
inconsequential.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Jason's Dilemma
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Jason's Dilemma
- References:
- Jason's Dilemma
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: <schmucks have a habit of calling people out in titles. Do you really want to be a schmuck?>
- From: JAE
- Jason's Dilemma
- From: Jim McGinn
- Jason's Dilemma
- Prev by Date: Re: butchering sites at the intersection of river channels (Re: AAT is based on comparative data (Re: Algis ranting about AAH
- Next by Date: Re: Questions about the Upper Paleolithic
- Previous by thread: Jason's Dilemma
- Next by thread: Re: Jason's Dilemma
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
