Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What is important

106 views
Skip to first unread message

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 8:57:28 AM12/8/15
to
W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics and
> other more important subjects.

See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
maintained by common sense, and as you rejected
common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
- is clueless and worthless.

And You really should let Ken rest in peace.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 10:35:26 AM12/8/15
to
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 6:57:28 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> >
> > I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics and
> > other more important subjects.
>
> See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> maintained by common sense, and as you rejected
> common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> - is clueless and worthless.

Hahaha! What moronic baloney.

> And You really should let Ken rest in peace.

If you truly believe that, why do you bring him up? More so-called
"thinking" by a poor idiot.

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 11:09:14 AM12/8/15
to


Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:fcfa674e-be46-4f69...@googlegroups.com...

>
> See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> maintained by common sense, and as you rejected
> common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> - is clueless and worthless.

|Hahaha! What moronic baloney.

Is it? so tell me, poor idiot, how you measured importance
of things you find important. Or what mathematical formulas
you've used to determine it.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 11:29:16 AM12/8/15
to
So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
inanities, just like Fischer did? At least he had an idea. You have
nothing at all to relieve your pathetic boredom.

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 1:13:49 PM12/8/15
to


Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:e08cf787-99ec-45c9...@googlegroups.com...

On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 9:09:14 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:fcfa674e-be46-4f69...@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> > maintained by common sense, and as you rejected
> > common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> > - is clueless and worthless.
>
> |Hahaha! What moronic baloney.
>
> Is it? so tell me, poor idiot, how you measured importance
> of things you find important. Or what mathematical formulas
> you've used to determine it.

|So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
|inanities, just like Fischer did?

No answer, just invectives. As expected from a relativistic
moron.
You really should leave Ken F.

JanPB

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 2:03:49 PM12/8/15
to
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 5:57:28 AM UTC-8, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
>
> > I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics and
> > other more important subjects.
>
> See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> maintained by common sense,

In philosophy, yes. In science, no.

> and as you rejected
> common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> - is clueless and worthless.

This is again a philosophical claim. In science it's incorrect.

--
Jan

JanPB

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 2:04:30 PM12/8/15
to
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 10:13:49 AM UTC-8, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:e08cf787-99ec-45c9...@googlegroups.com...
>
> On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 9:09:14 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >
> > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
> > dyskusyjnych:fcfa674e-be46-4f69...@googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> > > maintained by common sense, and as you rejected
> > > common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> > > - is clueless and worthless.
> >
> > |Hahaha! What moronic baloney.
> >
> > Is it? so tell me, poor idiot, how you measured importance
> > of things you find important. Or what mathematical formulas
> > you've used to determine it.
>
> |So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
> |inanities, just like Fischer did?
>
> No answer, just invectives.

You are copying my posts again. Tsk tsk.

--
Jan

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 2:05:53 PM12/8/15
to
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 11:13:49 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:e08cf787-99ec-45c9...@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
> > inanities, just like Fischer did?
>
> No answer, just invectives. As expected from a relativistic moron.

Which is EXACTLY what YOU do, so that makes YOU a "relativistic moron."
And THAT you certainly are: a moron about things relativistic.

> You really should leave Ken F.

How can I when YOU keep mentioning him?

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 2:51:29 PM12/8/15
to


Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:e40dd7b1-2069-4600...@googlegroups.com...

On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 5:57:28 AM UTC-8, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel
> napisał:
>
> > I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics
> > and
> > other more important subjects.
>
> See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> maintained by common sense,

|In philosophy, yes. In science, no.

Science can't deny. Science didn't defined this
term. Science doesn't know, what is important
and what is not. Common sense has a monopoly
here.
Samely, it has a monopoly on "right" and "wrong".
"wise" and "stupid". And many others. Do you know
Tarski? Science can't even manage "true" and
"false".
Your insane crusade never had a chance.


> and as you rejected
> common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> - is clueless and worthless.

|This is again a philosophical claim. In science it's incorrect.

No, it isn't. And science can't tell ANYTHING in the
subject of importance.
Do you really have different opinion? OK. Present it.
How do science determine, what is important?

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 2:54:01 PM12/8/15
to


Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:582a5c37-0fb8-445d...@googlegroups.com...
No, I'm only saying, that your fellow idiot instead answering
questions, spit invectives. As expected from a relativistic
moron.

JanPB

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 3:45:54 PM12/8/15
to
Excuse stating the bleeding obvious but your posts contain much more
invective than anyone else's around here so your point is hereby vacated,
based on the lack of standing.

REFERENCES
[1] M. Wozniak, the Google archive of posts on sci.physics.relativity,
2014-present.

--
Jan

JanPB

unread,
Dec 8, 2015, 4:01:38 PM12/8/15
to
On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 11:51:29 AM UTC-8, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:e40dd7b1-2069-4600...@googlegroups.com...
>
> On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 5:57:28 AM UTC-8, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> > W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel
> > napisał:
> >
> > > I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics
> > > and
> > > other more important subjects.
> >
> > See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> > maintained by common sense,
>
> |In philosophy, yes. In science, no.
>
> Science can't deny. Science didn't defined this
> term. Science doesn't know, what is important
> and what is not. Common sense has a monopoly
> here.

Not in science. Once you introduce "common sense", science
gets too close to mediaeval scholastics to be of enough use.
Of course a certain dose of "common ground" or "common understanding"
is a prerequisite in any domain of human activity but from your
claims(*) it looks like this is not at all what you had in mind.

(*) viz. "all physicists are idiots", "relativistic morons"

> Samely, it has a monopoly on "right" and "wrong".
> "wise" and "stupid". And many others.

Yes, but this is an entirely different concept of "common sense".
You use this term so loosely that it becomes entirely inapplicable
to science and its methods of inquiry.

> Do you know Tarski?

Personally, no, missed him by few months at Berkeley. But he has a room
named after him at the Math. Dept. there.

> Science can't even manage "true" and "false".

That's a different issue that's particular to QM (not all of its
interpretations).

> Your insane crusade never had a chance.

I'm not on any crusade, I just state the obvious. You have a lot to learn.

> > and as you rejected
> > common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> > - is clueless and worthless.
>
> |This is again a philosophical claim. In science it's incorrect.
>
> No, it isn't. And science can't tell ANYTHING in the
> subject of importance.
> Do you really have different opinion? OK. Present it.
> How do science determine, what is important?

You keep mixing orders of magnitude. What you refer to above is just
"common sense" at the everyday level that's present whatever you happen
to be doing, like preparing breakfast. You take this mundane aspect
of "common sense" and attempt to apply it in science where this kind of
stretch becomes a triviality. Of course the notion of "curved empty
spacetime" (say) "violates" my "common sense". Yawn. Next objection?

--
Jan

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 2:10:25 AM12/9/15
to
W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 21:45:54 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:

> > > > Is it? so tell me, poor idiot, how you measured importance
> > > > of things you find important. Or what mathematical formulas
> > > > you've used to determine it.
> > >
> > > |So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
> > > |inanities, just like Fischer did?
> > >
> > > No answer, just invectives.
> >
> > |You are copying my posts again. Tsk tsk.
> >
> > No, I'm only saying, that your fellow idiot instead answering
> > questions, spit invectives. As expected from a relativistic
> > moron.
>
> Excuse stating the bleeding obvious but your posts contain much more
> invective than anyone else's around here

Excuse starting bleeding obvious, but it doesn't change
the simple fact, that instead answering simple question
above your fellow idiot Gary is spitting invectives.

I'm answering most of your questions, you almost never
do.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 2:40:36 AM12/9/15
to
W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 22:01:38 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 11:51:29 AM UTC-8, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup
> > dyskusyjnych:e40dd7b1-2069-4600...@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 5:57:28 AM UTC-8, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> > > W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 14:35:45 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel
> > > napisał:
> > >
> > > > I think they're probably in school getting the REAL skinny on physics
> > > > and
> > > > other more important subjects.
> > >
> > > See, poor idiot, "important" term is created and
> > > maintained by common sense,
> >
> > |In philosophy, yes. In science, no.
> >
> > Science can't deny. Science didn't defined this
> > term. Science doesn't know, what is important
> > and what is not. Common sense has a monopoly
> > here.
>
> Not in science. Once you introduce "common sense", science
> gets too close to mediaeval scholastics to be of enough use.

Too bad then that "important" term is an important one,
and science doesn't know, what it means. And even worse
that it's not the only one.



> (*) viz. "all physicists are idiots", "relativistic morons"

In Polish "lack of common sense" and "idiocy" or "moronism"
can be treated as three names of the same thing. And your
moronic, lacking of common sense guru was so proud about the
first... Samely, as your moronic, lacking of common sense
fellow Gary. Why aren't you proud about being a bunch
of idiots? It means the same.
It's common sense deciding, who is an idiot; you're
ignoring it - take the consequences.

> > Samely, it has a monopoly on "right" and "wrong".
> > "wise" and "stupid". And many others.
>
> Yes, but this is an entirely different concept of "common sense".

Different from what?

> You use this term so loosely that it becomes entirely inapplicable
> to science and its methods of inquiry.

Too bad then that "important" term is an important one,
and science doesn't know, what it means. And even worse
that it's not the only one.

> > Do you know Tarski?
>
> Personally, no, missed him by few months at Berkeley. But he has a room
> named after him at the Math. Dept. there.
>
> > Science can't even manage "true" and "false".
>
> That's a different issue

Different from what?
Science IS UNABLE to manage "true" and "false".
And, comparing to "important" or "right" -
"true" is rather simple, don't you think?


> > Your insane crusade never had a chance.
>
> I'm not on any crusade, I just state the obvious.

All crusaders ever just stated the obvious.
Too bad "obvious" is - again - a common sense
term.


> > > and as you rejected
> > > common sense, your opinion about "what is important"
> > > - is clueless and worthless.
> >
> > |This is again a philosophical claim. In science it's incorrect.
> >
> > No, it isn't. And science can't tell ANYTHING in the
> > subject of importance.
> > Do you really have different opinion? OK. Present it.
> > How do science determine, what is important?
>
> You keep mixing orders of magnitude.

Did your common sense tell you I do?

> You take this mundane aspect
> of "common sense" and attempt to apply it in science where this kind of
> stretch becomes a triviality. Of course the notion of "curved empty
> spacetime" (say) "violates" my "common sense". Yawn. Next objection?

That ignoring such objections your Shit gets too close to
mediaeval scholastics to be of enough use. And we can see
it at GPS. Your moronic "standards" have to be ignored, so
they are ignored. Common sense warned your idiot guru, but
he didn't listen.
Too bad for your science.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 7:32:42 AM12/9/15
to
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 12:40:36 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> Too bad for your science.

Too bad for your brain: it appears to be completely disconnected from
reality. Or maybe there's nothing there except a ROM that contains
nothing but choice smatterings of nonsense and invective.

You spread your excrement all over this group again and again, yet you
feign offense when someone sends a little back at you. You are a liar
and a hypocrite.

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 10:52:04 AM12/9/15
to


Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:f2780c4c-fe4a-4b01...@googlegroups.com...

On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 12:40:36 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> Too bad for your science.

|Too bad for your brain: it appears to be completely disconnected from
|reality. Or maybe there's nothing there except a ROM that contains
|nothing but choice smatterings of nonsense and invective.

Wothless, meaningless spitting. As expected from a relativistic
moron.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 11:24:33 AM12/9/15
to
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 8:52:04 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Wothless, meaningless spitting. As expected from a relativistic
> moron.

Nonsense baloney, as expected from a mean-spirited non compos mentis.

JanPB

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 5:36:13 PM12/9/15
to
It's not worth my time unless my answer is of obvious value to someone else.
On you all arguments tend to be lost, you just keep repeating nonsense so
what's the point?

--
Jan

JanPB

unread,
Dec 9, 2015, 5:41:33 PM12/9/15
to
No, it's too bad for you only. One more time: There is common sense and there
is common sense. IOW, things in life have orders of magnitude. You are trying
to apply the everyday "common sense" to science. It'll never work. The "common
sense" used in science is a different thing, based on thorough knowledge of
what went on before and certain type of intuition that comes with practice,
like in playing an instrument. There are no shortcuts to this so until you
simply sit down and study physics, you'll never get anywhere with it.

--
Jan

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 1:47:01 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:36:13 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> On Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 11:10:25 PM UTC-8, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> > W dniu wtorek, 8 grudnia 2015 21:45:54 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> >
> > > > > > Is it? so tell me, poor idiot, how you measured importance
> > > > > > of things you find important. Or what mathematical formulas
> > > > > > you've used to determine it.
> > > > >
> > > > > |So you just sit around in your stupid blue funk, waiting to puke some
> > > > > |inanities, just like Fischer did?
> > > > >
> > > > > No answer, just invectives.
> > > >
> > > > |You are copying my posts again. Tsk tsk.
> > > >
> > > > No, I'm only saying, that your fellow idiot instead answering
> > > > questions, spit invectives. As expected from a relativistic
> > > > moron.
> > >
> > > Excuse stating the bleeding obvious but your posts contain much more
> > > invective than anyone else's around here
> >
> > Excuse starting bleeding obvious, but it doesn't change
> > the simple fact, that instead answering simple question
> > above your fellow idiot Gary is spitting invectives.
> >
> > I'm answering most of your questions, you almost never
> > do.
>
> It's not worth my time unless my answer

No, poor idiot. You're too stupid to answer.

JanPB

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 1:58:06 AM12/10/15
to
It's not worth my time answering someone who has nothing to say except repeating
"poor idiot", "relativistic moron", and "all physicists are idiots", all of that based on
imagining some fringe pseudoscience is applicable to physics.

--
Jan

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 2:02:14 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:41:33 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:

> No, it's too bad for you only. One more time: There is common sense and there
> is common sense.

Sure. There is common sense of your adversaries,
denying your Holy Shit, this is a set of prejudices.
And there is your common sense, whispering to you
about your incredible wisdom ind importance. This
one is completely different from the first. I agree.


> IOW, things in life have orders of magnitude. You are trying
> to apply the everyday "common sense" to science. It'll never work.

Because a relativistic moron said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mortals, hear the relativistic moron, queen of England!!!!!!!!!


> The "common
> sense" used in science is a different thing, based on thorough knowledge of
> what went on before and certain type of intuition that comes with practice,

Bull shit. You have no practice. Practice is not
using your idiotic standards, check it at GPS.
And it never will. Practice is esteeming common
sense. Practice is ruled by common sense.
Your Shit is not the first shit trying to crusade
against common sense; they always end the same
way: common sense and practice piss at them from
high above.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 2:10:12 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 07:58:06 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:

> > > It's not worth my time unless my answer
> >
> > No, poor idiot. You're too stupid to answer.
>
> It's not worth my time answering someone w

Besides, you're simply too stupid to answer.


> 1ho has nothing to say except repeating

I have a lot to say, you're just too stupid to
understand it.
So, maybe we'll return to the subject.
What is importat? How does your precious
physics determine it?


, what I'm talking about.
> "poor idiot", "relativistic moron", and "all physicists are idiots", all of that based on
> imagining some fringe pseudoscience is applicable to physics.

Applicability in your physics shit simply doesn't
bother me, since it stopped to be applicable in real
world.

JanPB

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 2:15:38 AM12/10/15
to
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 11:02:14 PM UTC-8, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:41:33 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
>
> > No, it's too bad for you only. One more time: There is common sense and there
> > is common sense.
>
> Sure. There is common sense of your adversaries,
> denying your Holy Shit, this is a set of prejudices.
> And there is your common sense, whispering to you
> about your incredible wisdom ind importance. This
> one is completely different from the first. I agree.

No, this is incorrect.

> > IOW, things in life have orders of magnitude. You are trying
> > to apply the everyday "common sense" to science. It'll never work.
>
> Because a relativistic moron said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Mortals, hear the relativistic moron, queen of England!!!!!!!!!

It's just the way it is. Nothing to do with me.

> > The "common
> > sense" used in science is a different thing, based on thorough knowledge of
> > what went on before and certain type of intuition that comes with practice,
>
> Bull shit. You have no practice. Practice is not
> using your idiotic standards, check it at GPS.

I checked the GPS and it works exactly as relativity models the world.

> And it never will. Practice is esteeming common
> sense. Practice is ruled by common sense.

As I said, this is not the "common sense" used as the guiding principle in science.

> Your Shit is not the first shit trying to crusade
> against common sense; they always end the same
> way: common sense and practice piss at them from
> high above.

What you call "common sense" is inapplicable to science. All your objections are
strictly philosophical (nothing wrong with that). You might as well stop yelling, it
won't change anything.

--
Jan

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 3:30:19 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 08:15:38 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 11:02:14 PM UTC-8, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> > W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:41:33 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> >
> > > No, it's too bad for you only. One more time: There is common sense and there
> > > is common sense.
> >
> > Sure. There is common sense of your adversaries,
> > denying your Holy Shit, this is a set of prejudices.
> > And there is your common sense, whispering to you
> > about your incredible wisdom ind importance. This
> > one is completely different from the first. I agree.
>
> No, this is incorrect.

What, exactly, is incorrect in the above?
We have two common senses. right?
One of them is denying the Shit. It's not even wrog.
The second is praising the Shit and you. This
is right.
What doesn't match?

> > > IOW, things in life have orders of magnitude. You are trying
> > > to apply the everyday "common sense" to science. It'll never work.
> >
> > Because a relativistic moron said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > Mortals, hear the relativistic moron, queen of England!!!!!!!!!
>
> It's just the way it is. Nothing to do with me.

It's just the way YOU SAY it is, poor idiot.

> > Bull shit. You have no practice. Practice is not
> > using your idiotic standards, check it at GPS.
>
> I checked the GPS and it works exactly as relativity models the world.

A lie, as expected from a relativistic moron.
GPS clocks are not working as your Shit models
them. GPS clocks are inconsistent with your
Shit standard and indicating t'=t.

> > And it never will. Practice is esteeming common
> > sense. Practice is ruled by common sense.
>
> As I said, this is not the "common sense" used as the guiding principle in science.

Too bad for your science. Because it is used as guiding
principle in practice.


> > Your Shit is not the first shit trying to crusade
> > against common sense; they always end the same
> > way: common sense and practice piss at them from
> > high above.
>
> What you call "common sense" is inapplicable to science.

Since your science got mad and rejected it, it isn't.
But unfortunately, it's your science that should worry
about it, not my common sense.


> All your objections are
> strictly philosophical

Not quite true, but I agree that they are from the
outside of your pathetic sandpit.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 6:45:53 AM12/10/15
to
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 11:47:01 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:36:13 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> > ....
>
> No, poor idiot. You're too stupid to answer.

No, he's obviously not stupid. This proves that YOU are the one engaged
in "worthless, meaningless spitting" as well as dishonesty of the worst
kind. You sit in the mess you made on the floor, mad at the world because
everyone expects you to clean up your own mess and act like a responsible
adult. At least use your "pathetic" sandbox.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 7:43:45 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 12:45:53 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 11:47:01 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> >
> > W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:36:13 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> > > ....
> >
> > No, poor idiot. You're too stupid to answer.
>
> No, he's obviously not stupid.

What scientific formula, or what measurement
told you that, poor idiot?
"Stupid" is not a scientific term. It is a common
sense term. Common sense is deciding, who is stupid
and who is not.
You were stupid enough to reject common sense.
Rather obvious, that you're far, far too stupid
to act like a responsible adult and face simple
consequences of your idiocy.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 8:36:40 AM12/10/15
to
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 5:43:45 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 12:45:53 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> >
> > On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 11:47:01 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> > >
> > > W dniu środa, 9 grudnia 2015 23:36:13 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> > > > ....
> > >
> > > No, poor idiot. You're too stupid to answer.
> >
> > No, he's obviously not stupid.
>
> What scientific formula, or what measurement
> told you that, poor idiot?

It's called REAL common sense, poor dunderhead, something of which you
are totally bereft.

> "Stupid" is not a scientific term. It is a common
> sense term. Common sense is deciding, who is stupid
> and who is not.

YOUR "common sense" is a stupid parody of reality.

> You were stupid enough to reject common sense.
> Rather obvious, that you're far, far too stupid
> to act like a responsible adult and face simple
> consequences of your idiocy.

You're just being a stupid yammerhead again, throwing back phrases that
you couldn't think of yourself - because your are STUPID!

You're behavior is shameful reflects poorly on your upbringing.

Stupid is as stupid does.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 9:11:47 AM12/10/15
to
W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 14:36:40 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> It's called REAL common sense,

Yes, it is called common sense.
And you were stupid enough to claim it's
just a set of prejudices.
This whole insane crusade of your guru
idiot never really had a chance.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 9:24:18 AM12/10/15
to
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 7:11:47 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> [Abysmally stupid baloney]

Go pound sand up your butt until it fills that void between your ears.

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 11:38:48 AM12/10/15
to


Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:89232216-647f-4a5e...@googlegroups.com...

On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 7:11:47 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> [Abysmally stupid baloney]

Abysymallystupid baloney, that you were stupid enough
to claim common sense a set of prejudices. Do you want
quotings?

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 2:21:18 PM12/10/15
to
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 9:38:48 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> [More Abysmally stupid baloney]
>
> Abysymallystupid baloney, that you were stupid enough
> to claim common sense a set of prejudices. Do you want
> quotings?

You mean this one, of course:

“Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen”
-- Albert Einstein

As even a stupid fool like you can see, I already have it. Try these on
for size:

"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."
- Albert Einstein

Ah, fits you like a glove, as does this one, unlimited one:

“The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits”
-- Albert Einstein

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not
sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
results." -- Albert Einstein

Which is EXACTLY what you are doing on this board. This also describes
you to a tee:

“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
-- Albert Einstein

Maciej Woźniak

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 3:24:39 PM12/10/15
to


Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:37855ea2-74ea-4b56...@googlegroups.com...


> Abysymallystupid baloney, that you were stupid enough
> to claim common sense a set of prejudices. Do you want
> quotings?

|You mean this one, of course:
|“Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen”

Exactly.



|"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."
|- Albert Einstein

That's explaining, why relativistic morons are always
condemning so easily.

|“The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits”
|-- Albert Einstein

Surely; genius is limited by common sense, stupidity finds it
a prejudice.


|"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
|results." -- Albert Einstein

Wonder, if your idiot guru ever played dices.

|“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”

Listen to your idiot guru, poor idiot. Your "proper clock" indication
doesn't matter, when real clocks of GPS have t'=t.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 10, 2015, 5:38:31 PM12/10/15
to
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 1:24:39 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> [Total lies and utter nonsense]

Poor, poor Maciej. Wanting desperately someone to talk to him but nobody
will, so he hurls insults and invectives in hopes of getting a response,
ANY kind of response.

Is that your problem, bunky? Well, despair no more! Here's the Relativity
group that allows you to spit acrimony to your heart's content. Bunky,
you are HOME!

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 11, 2015, 2:23:48 AM12/11/15
to
W dniu czwartek, 10 grudnia 2015 23:38:31 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 1:24:39 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >
> > [Total lies and utter nonsense]
>
> Poor, poor Maciej. Wanting desperately someone to talk to him but nobody
> will, so he hurls insults and invectives in hopes of getting a response,
> ANY kind of response.

Poor, poor Gary. Wanting desperatly to prove his
imagined intellectual advantage, but having no arguments,
so he hurls insults and invectives in hopes of showing
them.


>
> Is that your problem, bunky?

No. Your guess is wrong, as usual.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 11, 2015, 6:59:59 AM12/11/15
to
On Friday, December 11, 2015 at 12:23:48 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> [Hurled, regurgitated baloney]

No, I don't care about "intellectual advantage" or baloney "arguments"
that are meaningless. I'm just as confused about how the universe works
as the next guy, but my reaction to this is to try to understand. Yours
is to denigrate others and then get all "offended" when it comes back at
you. That is counterproductive and results in dishonesty and a distorted
psyche. I want no part of such a dismal spiral into hell, so get some
sand and start pounding.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 11, 2015, 8:07:58 AM12/11/15
to
W dniu piątek, 11 grudnia 2015 12:59:59 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Friday, December 11, 2015 at 12:23:48 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> >
> > [Hurled, regurgitated baloney]
>
> No, I don't care about "intellectual advantage"

A lie, as expected from a relativistic moron.

> or baloney "arguments"
> that are meaningless. I'm just as confused about how the universe works

Universe doesn't work. But you do. You would
use your time better trying to understand
this.
But, of course, you're quite complicated, and
your brain is small. Not surprising you prefer
to understand muons.

Gary Harnagel

unread,
Dec 11, 2015, 8:27:51 AM12/11/15
to
On Friday, December 11, 2015 at 6:07:58 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu piątek, 11 grudnia 2015 12:59:59 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> >
> > No, I don't care about "intellectual advantage"
>
> A lie, as expected from a relativistic moron.

A lie, as expected from a dishonest fool.

> > or baloney "arguments"
> > that are meaningless. I'm just as confused about how the universe works
>
> Universe doesn't work. But you do. You would
> use your time better trying to understand
> this.
> But, of course, you're quite complicated, and
> your brain is small. Not surprising you prefer
> to understand muons.

Word salad baloney from a reprobate.

mlwo...@wp.pl

unread,
Dec 11, 2015, 8:56:08 AM12/11/15
to
W dniu piątek, 11 grudnia 2015 14:27:51 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> > > or baloney "arguments"
> > > that are meaningless. I'm just as confused about how the universe works
> >
> > Universe doesn't work. But you do. You would
> > use your time better trying to understand
> > this.
> > But, of course, you're quite complicated, and
> > your brain is small. Not surprising you prefer
> > to understand muons.
>
> Word salad baloney from a reprobate.

0 new messages