Re: Hobba's misconceptions

Jem:
>Bilge wrote:
>
>> Jem, mental masturbating muppet:
>> >Bilge wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Obtuse and rambling is an apt description of that litany of
>> >irrelevancies you produced above. Do you plan to enumerate everything
>> >you think you know in the hope that something in the list might support
>> >your "case"?
>>
>> That would take too long.
>>
>> >Stay focused on the issue, Bilge. What you need to do is
>> >produce a *measurement* prediction (i.e. the measuring instruments used
>> >and the value) which differs between LET and SR.
>>
>> You need to define LET well enough so you can't backpedal from a
>> a lot of vague words.
>>
>> >BTW, let me clue you in to the fact that there isn't a physical
>> >difference between a sphere and a tetrahedron.
>>
>> Well, in that case, I won't be expecting you to produce any sort
>> of description of LET that could differentiate it from sorcery.
>> If you think there is no physical difference between a sphere and
>> a tetrahedron, how about something more definite? How about having
>> someone throw a pebble and a cinder block at your head and tell
>> me if there is any physical difference.
>>
>> >The only existence either of them has is logical so the very idea
>> >of a physical difference is nonsensical.
>>
>> Put down the crack pipe before it's too late.
>>
>
>That combination of ignorance and arrogance ought to earn you a spot on
>Dirk's website, if he's looking (and not playing favorites).
>
>You're now admitting to not even knowing what LET is after weeks of
>insisting that it's experimentally distinguishable from SR, and you

Where did I make such an admission? You are now resorting to outright
fabrication, instead of merely bullshitting.

>don't even recognize the inconsistency in that enough to be embarrassed
>by it. You're a piece of work, Bilge, and that over-inflated view you
>have of your "expertise" is comical (hint: those who actually *do* know
>don't feel the need to continually tell others that they do).
>
>At any rate, now that your "arguments" have degenerated into juvenile
>insults, it's clear that you never did have anything worthwhile to say
>about this issue, and also that you won't soon appreciate the simple
>facts about it which have been spoon-fed to you. I'm done, but feel
>free to continue talking to yourself.
.

Quantcast