Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 4 Dec 2005 22:59:37 -0800
JAE wrote:
<snip>
> > So despite the fact that you are unable to dispute any aspect of my
> > hypothesis I'm supposed to take your word for it that somewhere in this
> > book there's information that will refute my hypothesis. Yeah, right.
> > Like I haven't heard that toothless assertion a hundred times on this
> > NG.
>
> Well, Jim, I think I realize your problem. You appear dead-set in
> repeating a lie. That lie is that I am unable to dispute your
> 'hypothesis.' Now normally, repeating a lie would make you a liar, but
> since you're not altogether there, since your brain doesn't work right,
> it's probably unfair to call you a liar. You're just nuts.
Oh, I get it. I'm supposed to take your word for it that there is some
dispute of my hypothesis in some obscure book.
And you are suggesting that *I'm* nuts?
Jim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: mclark
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- References:
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: rmacfarl
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- From: JAE
- Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Prev by Date: Assignment for Mikey
- Next by Date: Re: Assignment for Mikey
- Previous by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Next by thread: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|