Re: Quantum Gravity 218.6: The Excluded 3 Rule in Combinatorics Compared to Our PI Rule

On Dec 22, 2:48 pm, "biggus" <dd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Wrong, not excluded, he did not need them.
Wrong, no Riccati Cheese needed
Wrong, no such thing as a GEF, dude.
Wrong.  3 is OK.  Trust me on this one.  If you can't do 3, then you will
never get to 4.
then your stuck. On 2.
If that were true, how come 3 can? and 3*3 is 9 ???
wrong again, your "Probable Causation/influence" theories have been erased
on the chalkboard of time.
Dudley did it.
Wrong, no Markov chain in Fibonacci numbers
<snip Causation Redundant Anti-Physics (CRAP)>

Readers of sound mind might be wondering whether biggus' pretended
anger/frustration and his/her/its slipping in of the expression "trust
me on this one" could possible indicate some sane argument despite the
profile of inability to stop using excrement profanity. Also, the
word "kOsher" has disappeared from his/her/its term of address to me,
after I criticized it, so readers might think that biggus (bogus, more
accurately) learns. Actually, biggus only learns in the way that
bullies learn, namely if they're trounced. Ignoring bullies
certainly works if you're sensitive to criticism and don't have any
reason to reply and if the bully can't "get to" you, but as in
politics and War, so in internet Academia so to speak, the best way is
to confront the bully as directly as possible without allowing the
bully to send you on wild goose chases with irrelevant and deceptive
maneuvers.

"Trust me" in biggus' vocabulary is the initiating remark for a wild
goose chase.

By the way, I must admit that I enjoy comparing sci.physics trolls and
graffiti artists with political and terrorist bullies because in both
cases the best Strategy is direct confrontation rather than
"diplomacy" or hiding one's head in the sand and hoping they'll go
away. If I've insulted Hillary and Bush and Obama and Bill and Romney
and Rudi in this process, good! They deserve it.

Osher Doctorow

.