Re: Are physics cranks employed?


When adults play chess the game ends by stalemate, out-of-time,
checkmate or honourable resignation.
When children play each other the rules of the game are not always
fully understood by both parties and the game ends in a tantrum
with one child upsetting the board and throwing the game pieces in
the air.
Victory is then awarded to the less aggressive participant.
One can simply refuse to play with a child or one can teach them
the subtlety of the game, but the child is never going to beat the
master until the child has learned both the rules and not to ignore the
master's moves.

The name "Phuckwit Duck" originates with this statement:
======================
I have to admit that I am demoralized at the moment.

I had hoped that we could fight ignorance with a proactive rather
than a reactive approach, but this is clearly the improper forum for
that. A quick survey of the length of threads initiated by or
drifting to nonsense compared to the length of threads based on
sound thinking reveals the true interest in the proposal.

While it would be a useful project to contribute to the FAQ,
the intent was to educate in the context of discussion, a virtual
"classroom" if you will. There's no point in contributing to a
reference that none of the "students" will read or attempt to learn
from. The intention was to focus on *exactly* what is wrong in
someone's thinking (which varies from person to person), set it
straight, and then make progress from there.

I had high hopes -- really -- that perhaps one misguided soul would
read something sensible and say, "Oh... Really?...Oh. I see I was
confused. OK, I get it now. Now what about...?" My head knew better,
my heart does not.

[sitting in the duck blind, waiting with a shotgun for a duck to
appear]
PD
======================
( This is PHYSICS, not math or logic, "proof " is completely
irrelevant - Tom Roberts, FAQ contributor.
Apparently physics doesn't require math or logic. )

======================
Followed up by:
======================
Phuckwit Duck:
Androcles, in your case, I will get over my disenchantment.
But I want this to be a fruitful exchange between the two of us, so
let's agree on some ground rules. We'll go things one little step
at a time.
When we get to a point of conflict, we'll identify what the
error is on either side, and the party in error MUST acknowledge
the error and remove the erroneous statement from further discussion.

To which I responded:
I'll agree to your terms.
My terms:
Either one of us could inadvertently make a typographical error
or simple arithmetic error, and should correct it if noticed.
I'd require: the error to be acknowledged and corrected; the
discussion continued until I have convince you or you have
convinced me. Failing to respond in a reasonable time
is a Pyrrhic victory and unsatisfactory. The penalty for failing
to respond is to be hounded by me at any time I choose.
========================

I've been blasting away at Phuckwit Duck's tail feathers ever since.
He always loses because he snips what he has no answer to,
effectively tossing the game pieces in the air.

Amusingly, he now claims I'm amoral, which is describe in
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/amoral as:

"being neither moral nor immoral; specifically : lying outside the
sphere to which moral judgments apply <science as such is
completely amoral -- W. S. Thompson>"

I am indeed amoral, whereas Duck is both immoral and unethical,
and very childish too.
Hence I take that accusation as a compliment, but of course I have
to slap his wrist when he pouts.
How he expects to find something wrong with my thinking is
a mystery, he has not succeeded in winning a game yet, saying
I'm amoral only shows how correct my thinking has been all along.
It will never occur to the Duck that there is something wrong with
his thinking. That would be unthinkable.

Again amusingly,
"your rusty skills and general incompetencies (incompetence) are reduced to
EXACTL(T)Y zero."
Hence my bright shiny skills and general competence are as sharp as ever,
I rarely need to use a double negative.
Androcles


"hanson" <hanson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:w1lGg.3956$E_.3141@xxxxxxxxxxx
| Awe, Paul.. awe... John Parker, the Andro & Sorcerer cranked
| you a little bit and then you began to crank yourself magnitudally.
| That is too bad, Paul. My soft heart is bleeding for you. But,
| see, that's what you get when you, like all those other ex-HS cum
| cyber teachers, can't leave their past class room authority behind.
| ahahahaha... The Sorcerer of course chuckles & keeps rubbing
| it into you... and then you continue to cry about the hives he gave
| to you and to your pitiful sidekick VDi/ork.... AHAHAHAHAH...
| But Paul, don't let me cramp your style. You are always good
| for a chuckle... Carry on. Thanks for the laughs... hahahanson
|
| --------------------
| > At one point I was demoralized, but I had high hopes that in conversing
| > with you, we might be able to find EXACTLY where your thinking had gone
| > wrong, and once that was corrected, we could proceed from there.
| > However, now I see that that it is not me that is demoralized but you
| > who are amoral, and that pointing out EXACTLY where your thinking goes
| > wrong does EXACTLY no good, as you insist on making EXACTLY the same
| > mistake over and over and over again until all doubts about your rusty
| > skills and general incompetencies are reduced to EXACTLTY zero.
| >
| > PD
| >
|
|



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: (OT) Kids these days
    ... they aren't allowed to play Red Rover or Tag! ... When I was in 6th grade, I played a game called "Smear the Queer." ... the best game of all was The Deadly Duck. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... |> When children play each other the rules of the game are not always ... |> [sitting in the duck blind, waiting with a shotgun for a duck to ... I see King Tut was able to find my "error" but you and Dork were not, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... When children play the game ends in throwing the game pieces in ... The name "Phuckwit Duck" originates with this statement: ... loses because he's tossing the game pieces in the air. ... evidence of amorality but stupidity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... |>> When adults play chess the game ends in... ... |>> duck to appear, while citingTom Roberts] ... |>> at Phuckwit Duck's tail feathers ever since. ... |> evidence of amorality but stupidity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... When children play each other the rules of the game are not always ... The name "Phuckwit Duck" originates with this statement: ... |> skills and general incompetencies are reduced to EXACTLTY zero. ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast