Re: I'd like to understand this better.

From: Ken S. Tucker (dynamics_at_vianet.on.ca)
Date: 08/23/04 

Date: 23 Aug 2004 02:26:49 -0700

D.McAnally@i'm_a_gnu.uq.net.au (David McAnally) wrote in message news:<cfut3q$676$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au>...
...
> >> snip a pile of McAnally BS...
> >> To quote McAnally from this thread on 07-07,
> >> =========================================================================
> >> I was imprecise.
>
> I admitted, as soon as I became aware of the problem, that I had been
> imprecise, and immediately rectified the situation with a clarification to
> explain it. Bill Hobba, for whom I was clarifying what I wrote, responded
> to my posting in a manner that demonstrated that he understood the
> clarification perfectly, which showed that my clarification achieved its
> purpose. I should not be castigated for having done what any *honourable*
> person would have done.

That's typical McAnally BS,
  Dump a pile a poop on someone and apologize
for missing the toilet, "I'm imprecise", ***
"honourable"...
 
> Ken S. Tucker's claim that what I wrote is BS makes no sense whatsoever.
> He has to justify himself.
> Ken S. Tucker wrote his scathing remarks about me because he was under
> the impression (knowing that I had killfiled him)

More McAnally BS, I'm supposed to "justify"
myself to a "killfile".

>that I would never know how he had denigrated me
>(he obviously did not have the intelligence to think of the prospect
> that somebody else might quote him verbatim,

Sue snitched and is probably killfiled now too.

>as had
> been done with the posting to which I am replying). Perhaps he should
> check into the laws of defamation sometime, because, with regard to my
> education, I have a Ph.D in Mathematical Physics, and I have had technical
> papers published in various prestigious International Physics journals.

There McAnally claimed his BS smells good,
so getting dumped on is good, because his
lawyer says so. Getting a Ph.d from Corn
Flake U, is a great cost saver.

> >If motion affects your clock you should take it back where you got it.
> :-)
> >In any case, remember that clocks don't measure the passage of time...
> >they simulate it.
> >Kind regards,
> >Sue...

Sue, McAnally often sends messages to me
via a third person, we're all fascinated.
 
> David

Regards
Ken S. Tucker