On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:35:40 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>In article <clark-BE7CBF.10432112112...@news.eternal-september.org>, >cl...@nospammatsceng.ohio-state.edu says...
>> In article <MPG.2b0985828c31796e1...@news.giganews.com>,
>> BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> > In article <71a2a568-20e8-4014-8400-3dbe27278c3b@googlegroups.com>, >> > john...@hotmail.com says...
>> > > On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
>> > > > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't got >> > > > a clue as to when Bush left office?
>> > > A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you claim.
>> > > Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
>> > I gave you a timescale, it is not my problem that you can't remember >> > when Bush left office and today.
>> > > For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food also >> > > doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, and >> > > good luck with running to google for help this time.
>> > When did I say food doubled?
>> > > Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely insane.
>> > You see bogey men when they are not their.
>> Not "their" what?
>Paying off their wagers. Something you don't know anything about.
He does know the difference between "their" and "there" as any fifth
grader does too. LMAO
> > > > On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > > > > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't > > > > > got > > > > > a clue as to when Bush left office?
> > > > A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you > > > > claim.
> > > > Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
> > > I gave you a timescale, it is not my problem that you can't remember > > > when Bush left office and today.
> > > > For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food > > > > also > > > > doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, > > > > and > > > > good luck with running to google for help this time.
> > > When did I say food doubled?
> > > > Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely > > > > insane.
> > > You see bogey men when they are not their.
> > Not "their" what?
> Paying off their wagers. Something you don't know anything about.
> > > > > On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > > > > > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you haven't > > > > > > got > > > > > > a clue as to when Bush left office?
> > > > > A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you > > > > > claim.
> > > > > Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
> > > > I gave you a timescale, it is not my problem that you can't remember > > > > when Bush left office and today.
> > > > > For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food > > > > > also > > > > > doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for sure, > > > > > and > > > > > good luck with running to google for help this time.
> > > > When did I say food doubled?
> > > > > Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely > > > > > insane.
> > > > You see bogey men when they are not their.
> > > Not "their" what?
> > Paying off their wagers. Something you don't know anything about.
> Because I have yet to lose one.
Everybody here knows you lost the wager do to the fact that you have failed to substantiate your claims. Your request that any proof you provide would have to be accepted as proof if you provided it was the wantings of a child.
> > > > > > On Saturday, 10 November 2012 14:12:27 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > > > > > > Do you need a time scale expressed in dates only because you > > > > > > > haven't > > > > > > > got > > > > > > > a clue as to when Bush left office?
> > > > > > A timescale is required for any meaning to be attached to what you > > > > > > claim.
> > > > > > Do you not understand that? No, of course you don't.
> > > > > I gave you a timescale, it is not my problem that you can't remember > > > > > when Bush left office and today.
> > > > > > For instance, another thing you said that is incorrect is that food > > > > > > also > > > > > > doubled. On what timescale is that? Not since 2008 that's for > > > > > > sure, > > > > > > and > > > > > > good luck with running to google for help this time.
> > > > > When did I say food doubled?
> > > > > > Yet again, you are either lying uncontrollably or you are genuinely > > > > > > insane.
> > > > > You see bogey men when they are not their.
> > > > Not "their" what?
> > > Paying off their wagers. Something you don't know anything about.
> > Because I have yet to lose one.
> Everybody here knows you lost the wager do to the fact that you have > failed to substantiate your claims. Your request that any proof you > provide would have to be accepted as proof if you provided it was the > wantings of a child.
> Pay off your wagers, deadbeat.
Bertie, you are boring to the point of extinction. Your time would be much better spent mastering the rudiments of the English language.
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>In article <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>, >john...@hotmail.com says...
>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>> > When did I say food doubled?
>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
>Have you checked the cost of food lately?
The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> > >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > >> > When did I say food doubled?
> > >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most > > >> cases" perhaps.
> > >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> > The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> > made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> > How about just saying "You're right"?
> Check the data.
Will that change that you did say that the cost of food had doubled?
-- Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>> >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>> >> > When did I say food doubled?
>> >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
>> >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
>> made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>Check the data.
Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
lie out of it. He was right.
You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
obvious.
> >> >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> >> >> > When did I say food doubled?
> >> >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
> >> >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> >> made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> >> How about just saying "You're right"?
> >Check the data.
> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
> doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
> lie out of it. He was right.
> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> obvious.
> > >> >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > >> >> > When did I say food doubled?
> > >> >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in > > >> >> most cases" perhaps.
> > >> >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> > >> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> > >> made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> > >> How about just saying "You're right"?
> > >Check the data.
> > Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
> > doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
> > lie out of it. He was right.
> > You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> > obvious.
> Check the data.
Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
-- Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
>> >> >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>> >> >> > When did I say food doubled?
>> >> >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
>> >> >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>> >> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
>> >> made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
>> >> How about just saying "You're right"?
>> >Check the data.
>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
>> doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
>> lie out of it. He was right.
>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>> obvious.
>Check the data. >Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried
to lie out of it. He was right.
You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
obvious.
> >> >> >> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> >> >> >> > When did I say food doubled?
> >> >> >> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled in most cases" perhaps.
> >> >> >Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >> >> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying that he
> >> >> made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the subject.
> >> >> How about just saying "You're right"?
> >> >Check the data.
> >> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
> >> doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried to
> >> lie out of it. He was right.
> >> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> >> obvious.
> >Check the data.
> >Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that food
> doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or tried
> to lie out of it. He was right.
> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> obvious.
Too bad Obama is transparent, like he said he would be.
Do you really like having a president who lies to you with every breath?
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the
>>>>> subject.
>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>>>> Check the data.
>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>>> obvious.
>> Check the data.
> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you that
> you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the data,
> or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to back
any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring the pot.
>On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes the
>>>>>> subject.
>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>>>>> Check the data.
>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>>>> obvious.
>>> Check the data.
>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you that
>> you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the data,
>> or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to back
>any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring the pot.
I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
he is really just limited in intellectual development.
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
>>>>>>> the subject.
>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>>>>>> Check the data.
>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>>>>> obvious.
>>>> Check the data.
>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
>> the pot.
> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
since mastered.
Carbon wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
>> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
>>>>>>>> the subject.
>>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>>>>>>> Check the data.
>>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>>>>>> obvious.
>>>>> Check the data.
>>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
>>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
>>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
>>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
>>> the pot.
>> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
>> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
> You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
> same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
> since mastered.
Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> > On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> >>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
> >>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
> >>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
> >>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
> >>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
> >>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
> >>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
> >>>>>>> the subject.
> >>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
> >>>>>> Check the data.
> >>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
> >>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
> >>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
> >>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> >>>>> obvious.
> >>>> Check the data.
> >>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
> >>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
> >>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
> >> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
> >> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
> >> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
> >> the pot.
> > I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
> > he is really just limited in intellectual development.
> You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
> same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
> since mastered.
> Carbon wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> >>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
> >>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
> >>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
> >>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
> >>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
> >>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> >>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
> >>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
> >>>>>>>> the subject.
> >>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
> >>>>>>> Check the data.
> >>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
> >>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
> >>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
> >>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> >>>>>> obvious.
> >>>>> Check the data.
> >>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
> >>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
> >>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
> >>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
> >>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
> >>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
> >>> the pot.
> >> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
> >> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
> > You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
> > same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
> > since mastered.
> > It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
> Kinda like Baker.
Baker agrees with Carb's politics, therefore he can't be a troll.
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:24:54 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>Carbon wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
>>> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>>>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>>>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>>>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>>>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>>>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
>>>>>>>>> the subject.
>>>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>>>>>>>> Check the data.
>>>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>>>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>>>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>>>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>>>>>>> obvious.
>>>>>> Check the data.
>>>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
>>>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
>>>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>>>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>>>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
>>>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
>>>> the pot.
>>> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
>>> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
>> You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
>> same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
>> since mastered.
>> It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
>Kinda like Baker.
No way. Baker may be argumentative but he's not a dummy.
> On Nov 14, 7:24 am, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Carbon wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> > >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> > >>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> > >>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
> > >>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> > >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
> > >>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
> > >>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
> > >>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
> > >>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
> > >>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> > >>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
> > >>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
> > >>>>>>>> the subject.
> > >>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
> > >>>>>>> Check the data.
> > >>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
> > >>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
> > >>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
> > >>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> > >>>>>> obvious.
> > >>>>> Check the data.
> > >>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
> > >>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
> > >>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
> > >>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
> > >>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
> > >>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
> > >>> the pot.
> > >> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
> > >> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
> > > You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
> > > same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
> > > since mastered.
> > > It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
> > Kinda like Baker.
> Baker agrees with Carb's politics, therefore he can't be a troll.
You're sure about that, are you? You really think you know what my
politics are, do you?
> On Nov 14, 1:54 pm, Dene <gdst...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 14, 7:24 am, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > Carbon wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
> > > >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
> > > >>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
> > > >>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
> > > >>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> > > >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
> > > >>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
> > > >>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
> > > >>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
> > > >>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
> > > >>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
> > > >>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
> > > >>>>>>>> the subject.
> > > >>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
> > > >>>>>>> Check the data.
> > > >>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
> > > >>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
> > > >>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
> > > >>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
> > > >>>>>> obvious.
> > > >>>>> Check the data.
> > > >>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
> > > >>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
> > > >>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
> > > >>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
> > > >>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
> > > >>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
> > > >>> the pot.
> > > >> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
> > > >> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
> > > > You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
> > > > same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
> > > > since mastered.
> > > > It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
> > > Kinda like Baker.
> > Baker agrees with Carb's politics, therefore he can't be a troll.
> You're sure about that, are you? You really think you know what my
> politics are, do you?
> LOL
I don't think any one cares what your politics are.
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:54:31 -0800, Dene wrote:
> On Nov 14, 7:24 am, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Carbon wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
>>>> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>>>>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Check the data.
>>>>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
>>>>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check
>>>>>> the data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>>>>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>>>>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
>>>>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is
>>>>> stirring the pot.
>>>> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a
>>>> troll, he is really just limited in intellectual development.
>>> You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat
>>> the same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert
>>> has long since mastered.
>>> It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
>> Kinda like Baker.
> Baker agrees with Carb's politics, therefore he can't be a troll.
I'm what you would classify as a Liberal, where Alan is more of a
libertarian.
I usually fast-forward through the catfights and don't know what beef
you guys have with Alan. But generally he will have a cite or at least a
rational argument. I don't see how that is comparable to Bert's normal
M.O., which is to just make shit up.
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:55:37 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>In article <ca0047b0-38fd-48ec-9b6e-
>262bcbe98...@vb8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, alangba...@telus.net says...
>> On Nov 14, 1:54 pm, Dene <gdst...@aol.com> wrote:
>> > On Nov 14, 7:24 am, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>> > > Carbon wrote:
>> > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 06:56:57 -0600, bknight wrote:
>> > > >> On 14 Nov 2012 04:27:37 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:38:32 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>> > > >>>> In article <MPG.2b0cdb4ce9f096741...@news.giganews.com>, BAR
>> > > >>>> <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>>> In article <p3r5a8h22gdiv78pd0n59sd3l5k1pib...@4ax.com>,
>> > > >>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>> > > >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:14:25 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>> In article <9sl4a89jcc89q63c3qi7q618heeiikc...@4ax.com>,
>> > > >>>>>>> bkni...@conramp.net says...
>> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:12 -0500, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>>> In article
>> > > >>>>>>>>> <92a02e31-9176-45a6-afd0-e1b40e33af91@googlegroups.com>,
>> > > >>>>>>>>> john...@hotmail.com says...
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 11 November 2012 14:51:54 UTC, BAR wrote:
>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> When did I say food doubled?
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Oh, I dunno. When you wrote "goods, gas and food have doubled
>> > > >>>>>>>>>> in most cases" perhaps.
>> > > >>>>>>>>> Have you checked the cost of food lately?
>> > > >>>>>>>> The perfect BAR example. He asks a question, which is denying
>> > > >>>>>>>> that he made a statement. When proved to be wrong he changes
>> > > >>>>>>>> the subject.
>> > > >>>>>>>> How about just saying "You're right"?
>> > > >>>>>>> Check the data.
>> > > >>>>>> Another sharp turn from the issue which was that you DID say that
>> > > >>>>>> food doubled and either didn't remember it in your foggy brain, or
>> > > >>>>>> tried to lie out of it. He was right.
>> > > >>>>>> You're just too transparent and fool enough to think that it isn't
>> > > >>>>>> obvious.
>> > > >>>>> Check the data.
>> > > >>>> Did you say food had doubled, and when it was pointed out to you
>> > > >>>> that you'd claimed that, did you immediately insist people check the
>> > > >>>> data, or did you instead try to claim you hadn't said it?
>> > > >>> Typical Bert maneuver. Nearly all of his claims are unprovable or
>> > > >>> demonstrably untrue. He doesn't care. It's like he's ever going to
>> > > >>> back any of them up. Like any troll, all he cares about is stirring
>> > > >>> the pot.
>> > > >> I really don't think so Carbs. He's not smart enough to be a troll,
>> > > >> he is really just limited in intellectual development.
>> > > > You don't have to be smart to be a troll. You just have to repeat the
>> > > > same clueless bullshit over and over, which is something Bert has long
>> > > > since mastered.
>> > > > It's a waste of time trying to reason with him.
>> > > Kinda like Baker.
>> > Baker agrees with Carb's politics, therefore he can't be a troll.
>> You're sure about that, are you? You really think you know what my
>> politics are, do you?
>> LOL
>I don't think any one cares what your politics are.
