Re: Ballistic Theory, Progress report...Suitable for 5yo Kids


"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1128599789.053164.108890@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Androcles wrote:
| > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1128426239.166551.100160@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Androcles wrote:
| > | > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:1128330177.421954.210680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | Androcles wrote:
| > | > |
| > | > | > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in
| > | > message news:dhm3i2$f75$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > | Androcles wrote:
| > | > | > | > I think you have demonstrated that I was right when
saying:
| > | > | > | > "Having realized that you screwed up, you must find
| > | > | > | > something else to talk about."
| > | > | > | > How could you screw up such a simple case of elementary
| > | > | > | > Roche limit and get it 3,000,000,000% wrong, tusselad?
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | I am beginning to suspect that your stupidity is even
| > | > | > | greater than I initially could bring myself to believe.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I'm sure the opinion of a phuckwit is highly regarded by
| > | > | > the other phuckwits, tusselad.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > | I now think it's so gigantic that you do NOT realize
| > | > | > | how thoroughly you screw up when you claimed:
| > | > | > | "If the Moon were a fluid
| > | > | > | it would break apart like droplets of mercury."
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I preceeded that with "If", tusselad; how could you screw up
| > | > | > such a simple case of elementary logic? Well, in your case
how
| > | > | > could you not screw it up?
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | I would like to say "nice try".
| > | > | But I can't.
| > | > | It was an extraordinary stupid attempt to divert
| > | > | the attention from the fact that you have still
| > | > | not realized that your statement:
| > | > | "If the Moon were a fluid
| > | > | it would break apart like droplets of mercury."
| > | > | is factually wrong.
| > | >
| > | > The rings of Saturn are factually wrong, are they, tusselad?
| > |
| > | I would like to say "nice try".
| > | But I can't.
| > | It was an extraordinary stupid attempt
| >
| > *** off.
| > Androcles
|
| OK, I will do that.
|
| But before doing so, I will sum up what we
| have learned.

Don't bother, you'll never learn anything.

|
| We have learned that Androcles is so stupid
| that he fails to realize that his statement:
| "If the Moon were a fluid it would break
| apart like droplets of mercury."
| is factually wrong.

Learn the contrapositive.
The moon does not break up into droplets of mercury, therefore
the moon is not fluid. That's a fact.
You are a stupid tusselad who thinks Algol is eclipsed by an accretion
disk that bounces of the surface, that's a fact.


| Androcles' comment:
| " I preceeded that with "If", tusselad; how could you
| screw up such a simple case of elementary logic?"
| have taught us that Androcles is so stupid that he thinks
| his statement: "If the Moon were a fluid
| it would break apart like droplets of mercury."
| is correct just because it starts with an "If".
|
| Androcles' comment:
| "The rings of Saturn are factually wrong, are they, tusselad?"
| has further taught us that Androcles is so stupid that he
| thinks that unless the Moon of the planet Earth would break
| apart like droplets of mercury if it were fluid, the rings
| of the planet Saturn cannot exist.
|
| Paul, fucked off
Thank goodness.

Androcles.

.

Quantcast