Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws

From: Ken S. Tucker (dynamics_at_vianet.on.ca)
Date: 11/27/04 

Date: 27 Nov 2004 12:49:11 -0800

thermogirl2002au@yahoo.com.au (Judith Hardy) wrote in message news:<d1eba9fc.0411270327.252ddec5@posting.google.com>...
> dynamics@vianet.on.ca (Ken S. Tucker) wrote in message news:<2202379a.0411240143.3a1a3ab2@posting.google.com>...
> > D.McAnally@i'm_a_gnu.uq.net.au (David McAnally) wrote in message news:<cnv74c$61c$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au>...
> > > "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> writes:
> >
> > To Androcles
> > McAnally, shadows with the pseudonym Speicher,
> > enjoy your tour into the psychotic world of
> > ultra kook dom, the're trolls, by any other name.
> > Ken
>
> I have not posted to this newsgroup for some time, but your comments
> make me want to puke.

Yes, I read your post Judith, and I think I
could arrange for a bit of "morning sickness"
you want. When?
 
> Your disgusting and derisive comments were also made without making
> any genuine contribution to the thread. Your empty-headed tripe makes
> you a troll, because you waste everybody's time with your comment.
>
> You also made your response knowing full-well that neither Speicher
> nor McAnally would ever get to see it and that they would not be able
> to defend themselves against your unwarranted abuse. Speicher will
> not be able to read your post because he no longer reads the group,
> and McAnally will not be able to read your post because he has you
> kill filed (both of these are public knowledge). Attacking people who
> have no recourse to respond is the action of a yellow-bellied coward.

So you interested in the color of my belly are you,
I'm beginning to like you.
 
> It is interesting that you did not see fit to write explaining what
> you thought was so wrong with what McAnally wrote, and making specific
> objections to his points. Presumably you do not understand what the
> discussion was about, and, therefore, were not able to any worthwhile
> comments or contributions. It is interesting that you used 'trolls'
> to rudely attack two people who have no recourse to answer you, when
> you, yourself, are a troll of the worst kind. It is evident that you
> are actually describing yourself and your own nature, when you use the
> word 'troll' (after all, you were the person who introduced this
> epithet).

Yes, I was terribly mean, I'll make it up to you.
 
> Androcles is a well-known fool, and his connection with reality has
> been served no useful purpose when you treat him as if he was more
> intelligent than he actually is, as you have done above.

Oh, that's a sure sign of affection, you and I
could gossip about the neighbours after were done
getting you started on "morning sickness".
 
> Is there any truth to the rumour that you changed one letter in your
> name from an 'F' to a 'T'?

None at all, but thanks for asking. It's not everyday
a woman e-travels 12,000 miles to flirt with me.

I'd would have stuck with "F" but I got to many
messages from all them beautiful starlets, but
since the most beautiful women come from Australia
I thought I'd use "Tucker", meaning "I nourish the
babes".

When?
Ken F Tucker

Relevant Pages