Don't give up; Uber has not hired any ducks yet: Keep looking - quack quack

[James McGinn]

On Sunday, January 21, 2018 at 5:15:17 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 21, 2018 at 5:01:25 PM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
>
> > notice how short McGinn's sentences become when he is angry.
>
> Also, how many posts he blasts out from the past, one after another, completely meaningless? I guess he doesn't like having his chain jerked... but he is such an easy target since he is as stupid as a lamppost and knows virtually nothing about the subject matter...

I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure you are right and so completely unable to explain how or why.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Pecos Hank: SCIENCE INSIDE A TORNADO - Decoding the EF5
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16901

[Odd Bodkin]

> http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f &t 901
>

James, it may not occur to you that where you are mentally with all this is
a sad, familiar problem.

At some point in your feeble attempts to understand this stuff, you came
across what you perceived as conflicting information. Perhaps it was
something as simple as looking at a picture called a phase diagram, and
elsewhere a textual claim that gaseous water can exist at that temperature
and pressure. You looked one way and saw the diagram, you looked the other
way and saw the text claim. “Something’s amiss,” you rightfully told
yourself. But this is where your mental station wagon veered off the little
country road and plunged into the bushes. Because a NORMAL person’s
response would be, “there must be something here I don’t understand.” And
after that point, a NORMAL person would entertain options to either dive in
deeper to learn where his misperception was, or to decide it wasn’t of
sufficient interest to spend the effort to learn it and instead to resign
himself to not understanding it well.

But, you see, Jim, the station wagon of your ego was already pretty
battered and rusted out from years of abuse and feeling inferior, and so it
was not acceptable for you to say, “I’m misunderstanding something.”
Instead, your mind started to tell itself self-protective lies, and as you
know, lies compound and escalate. The first lie was, “it must be the fault
of the explainers that I don’t get it. They must not be able to explain it
well.” This then became, “Of course they can’t explain it! A nonsensical
idea can’t be explained!” Which was then followed by a frantic search for
“anomalies” which proved the case that nobody understands a damn thing
about it, and it’s not just you that doesn’t get it. Which was then
followed by the whopper, “But they’re AFRAID to confess that they don’t
understand it, because they’ll lose face and reputation and earnings,”
which are the luxuries you’ve never enjoyed anyway. And this then quickly
escalated to the self-soothing insight: “But at least I alone am able to
see that there is a problem which no one else will admit is there! This not
only makes me the most honest one here, but also a true genius and a true
scientist at heart! And that means I have the smarts to figure out the
truth!”

At this point, the station wagon was through the brush line, and had
crossed a couple of creeks and cattle meadows, but the bumpy ride you
attributed to being the hard knocks of being a True Scientist and an
unappreciated one at that. It never crossed your mind, not since the first
lies passed through your lips, that you were completely off the road and
driving through a bog of your own choices.

I suggest you turn off your engine and start calling for a tow truck. When
dragged back to the road, it would be then a simple matter to say, “Ok,
there must be something here I don’t understand....”

But, Jim, do you have the balls to do that?

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[James McGinn]

So, you have this long-winded, contrived explanation for why I can't see what you can't explain. Maybe you should consider the possibility that they reason I can't see what you can't explain is because nobody can explain it.

The reason you can't find reproducible experimental evidence of your magical 'cold steam' is the same reason nobody has been able to find reproducible experimental evidence of ghosts: it doesn't exist.

Billions of people believe in ghosts. Billions will claim to have seen evidence of ghosts. Undoubtedly many meteorologists--possibly all of them--genuinely believe in 'cold steam.'

You believe in the infallibility of scientists. I don't. You believe science progresses based on truth. I believe science progresses based on models that appeal to people on an aesthetic level.

I let the evidence lead me to the truth. Most people look for evidence that confirms what they already believe.

Many years ago I noticed that the vortice or cone of tornadoes had no explanation. Observation brought me to the conclusion that it must be some kind of plasma. Further research brought me to suspect that the origins of the plasma must have something to do with moist/dry wind shear. A process of elimination brought me to the conclusion that the likeliest candidate for molecular basis of this plasma was H2O.

It was at this point that I didn't make the amateurish mistake that everybody else would have made. IOW, it is at this point that I didn't just assume that H2O was a simple substance that is well understood.

Being a physicist with a fairly complex grasp of quantum mechanics, I eventually found what everybody had missed. My discovery will not only serve as the basis of explaining the plasma of vortices but will lead to resolution of all of H2O's anomalies:
Resolving the Anomalies of H2O
https://www.meetup.com/Resolving-the-Anomalies-of-H2O/events/246928935/

[Serg io]

yep, it is that first lie, first falsehood accepted as truth, that
causes a huge storm of bullshit.

from McGinn's above link, he knows he is a failure at weather;

"JMcG: Tornadogenesis (and/or the study of severe weather) is a failed
paradigm. Members of failed paradigms will be mostly concerned with
making sure nobody else shows them up. Peer review is just a weapon they
use to achieve that end. Don’t fall for it."

[pnal...@gmail.com]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 12:54:15 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> Being a physicist with a fairly complex grasp of quantum mechanics, I eventually found what everybody had missed. My discovery will not only serve as the basis of explaining the plasma of vortices but will lead to resolution of all of H2O's anomalies:
> Resolving the Anomalies of H2O
> https://www.meetup.com/Resolving-the-Anomalies-of-H2O/events/246928935/

Jim, you clearly are not a physicist, that is a huge exaggeration, and from what I've read you don't have a firm grasp of anything scientific at all. You and your ideas are doomed to just be pitched onto the growing pile of fellow cranks and their ideas, where they belong. It can be no other way without observations and/or experiments, of which you have exactly zero.

[James McGinn]

Don't get your panties in a bunch.

I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure you are right and so completely unable to say how or why.

Maybe science isn't your thing. Have you considered other hobbies?

[James McGinn]

Look up the Kruger/Dunning effect.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 2:49:39 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> Look up the Kruger/Dunning effect.

I don't need to, I already know it fits *you* to a "T".

"The cognitive bias of illusory superiority derives from the metacognitive inability of low-ability persons to recognize their own ineptitude; without the self-awareness of metacognition, low-ability people cannot objectively evaluate their actual competence or incompetence."

I can't imagine a better model for a low-ability person that your very self. I'm really surprised that your picture isn't there on Wiki...

[James McGinn]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 2:54:05 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 2:49:39 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> > Look up the Kruger/Dunning effect.
>
> I don't need to, I already know it fits *you* to a "T".

Maybe if you were as obsessed with science as you are with me you wouldn't be so frustrated all the time.

[Odd Bodkin]

Pretty much what I described, just in more “aesthetic” language.

[Odd Bodkin]

Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain and what you won’t
read about. So you see, it’s about choices, not abilities. I make my
choices based on the pointlessness of doing that for you, given that you
don’t really want me to explain it anyway. And your choice to refuse to
learn something because it involves more than looking at pictures.

> Maybe you should consider the possibility that they reason I can't see
> what you can't explain is because nobody can explain it.

I know better. I’ve read. You haven’t. Fabricate whatever fantasy you want
from a position of abject ignorance.

>
> The reason you can't find reproducible experimental evidence of your
> magical 'cold steam' is the same reason nobody has been able to find
> reproducible experimental evidence of ghosts: it doesn't exist.
>
> Billions of people believe in ghosts. Billions will claim to have seen
> evidence of ghosts. Undoubtedly many meteorologists--possibly all of
> them--genuinely believe in 'cold steam.'
>
> You believe in the infallibility of scientists. I don't. You believe
> science progresses based on truth. I believe science progresses based on
> models that appeal to people on an aesthetic level.

Well, there’s your problem right there. That’s not how science works, and
nobody cares about your gut level instincts or your aesthetics.

>
> I let the evidence lead me to the truth. Most people look for evidence
> that confirms what they already believe.
>
> Many years ago I noticed that the vortice or cone of tornadoes had no
> explanation. Observation brought me to the conclusion that it must be
> some kind of plasma. Further research brought me to suspect that the
> origins of the plasma must have something to do with moist/dry wind
> shear. A process of elimination brought me to the conclusion that the
> likeliest candidate for molecular basis of this plasma was H2O.
>
> It was at this point that I didn't make the amateurish mistake that
> everybody else would have made. IOW, it is at this point that I didn't
> just assume that H2O was a simple substance that is well understood.
>
> Being a physicist with a fairly complex grasp of quantum mechanics, I
> eventually found what everybody had missed. My discovery will not only
> serve as the basis of explaining the plasma of vortices but will lead to
> resolution of all of H2O's anomalies:
> Resolving the Anomalies of H2O
> https://www.meetup.com/Resolving-the-Anomalies-of-H2O/events/246928935/
>
> James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
>

[Serg io]

=> film the meet-up and put it on you tube, a valuable contribution <=

more meet-ups here;

https://www.meetup.com/Resolving-the-Anomalies-of-H2O

you can join too; (upper right button)

best air fare via Kayak

Hotel: Bella Vista Inn $50/night special for meetup, bring bug spray.
all night 7/11 next door

[James McGinn]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > So, you have this long-winded, contrived explanation for why I can't see
> > what you can't explain.
>
> Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain

Let me know if you ever decide to reveal your secret to the world.

[James McGinn]

Okay, but, Sergio this is a science meetup. So . . .

[James McGinn]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain and what you won’t
> read about. So you see, it’s about choices, not abilities. I make my
> choices based on the pointlessness of doing that for you, given that you
> don’t really want me to explain it anyway. And your choice to refuse to
> learn something because it involves more than looking at pictures.
>
> > Maybe you should consider the possibility that they reason I can't see
> > what you can't explain is because nobody can explain it.
>
> I know better. I’ve read. You haven’t. Fabricate whatever fantasy you want
> from a position of abject ignorance.

Most people can't tell the difference between what they genuinely understand and what they only believe. These people will always present an excuse for why they can't explain what they claim they understand. The reality is that if you understand something you will have no trouble explaining how you understand. When people refuse to explain what they claim they understand it is--always--because they don't really understand, they just believe.

You are not a critical thinker. You are a believer. Belief is a barrier. In order to break through the barrier you have critical thinking skills and you have to practice them often. It takes years to get good at this. You aren't going to become a critical thinker by reading or by posting on usenet.

[James McGinn]

On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> Well, there’s your problem right there. That’s not how science works, and
> nobody cares about your gut level instincts or your aesthetics.

Like you have a clue. Only a retard would come to a science forum claim they know something then refuse to explain it.

[Odd Bodkin]

Your refusal to read has nothing to do with the information being secret.

You are flailing about trying to shame people into spoon feeding you. “If
you knew what you were talking about, you would explain it to me and not
ask me to read the same information you’ve read. I don’t want to read the
same information you’ve read. I want you to feed it to me. Do what I say,
or I shall throw a hissy fit. It has always worked for me in the past.”

[Odd Bodkin]

That’s a rather desperate and childish gesture of manipulation, Jim.
As I said, a NORMAL person who wanted to know answers would read up on the
subject and not just look at the pictures.

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>> Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain and what you won’t
>> read about. So you see, it’s about choices, not abilities. I make my
>> choices based on the pointlessness of doing that for you, given that you
>> don’t really want me to explain it anyway. And your choice to refuse to
>> learn something because it involves more than looking at pictures.
>>
>>> Maybe you should consider the possibility that they reason I can't see
>>> what you can't explain is because nobody can explain it.
>>
>> I know better. I’ve read. You haven’t. Fabricate whatever fantasy you want
>> from a position of abject ignorance.
>
> Most people can't tell the difference between what they genuinely
> understand and what they only believe.
> These people will always present an excuse for why they can't explain
> what they claim they understand. The reality is that if you understand
> something you will have no trouble explaining how you understand. When
> people refuse to explain what they claim they understand it
> is--always--because they don't really understand, they just believe.

I know you tell yourself lies like this to try to manipulate people into
doing things for you. It won’t work. Adults know better. You are not a
functioning adult. These games you play are for manipulative children, not
for functioning adults.

>
> You are not a critical thinker. You are a believer. Belief is a barrier.
> In order to break through the barrier you have critical thinking skills
> and you have to practice them often. It takes years to get good at this.
> You aren't going to become a critical thinker by reading or by posting on usenet.

Fascinating you should say that when you are so obsessed with Usenet that
you repost closed conversations and look at your own posts to up the views.


See the psychosis going on there, Jim?

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:07 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>> So, you have this long-winded, contrived explanation for why I can't see
> >>> what you can't explain.
> >>
> >> Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain
> >
> > Let me know if you ever decide to reveal your secret to the world.
> >
>
> Your refusal to read

You read it and you can't explain anything so what make you think it will be different for me?

Besides I did read it. It didn't make your point for you.

[James McGinn]

You got nothing!

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:08 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > You are not a critical thinker. You are a believer. Belief is a barrier.
> > In order to break through the barrier you have critical thinking skills
> > and you have to practice them often. It takes years to get good at this.
> > You aren't going to become a critical thinker by reading or by posting on usenet.
>
> Fascinating you should say that when you are so obsessed with Usenet that
> you repost closed conversations and look at your own posts to up the views.

If you can't explain it you don't understand it.

Its really that simple.

Usenet makes it easy for people to pretend that they understand what they only believe.

[Odd Bodkin]

Sure looks like a 4 year old sulking to me.

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:07 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So, you have this long-winded, contrived explanation for why I can't see
>>>>> what you can't explain.
>>>>
>>>> Nah. It’s about why you can’t see what I won’t explain
>>>
>>> Let me know if you ever decide to reveal your secret to the world.
>>>
>>
>> Your refusal to read
>
> You read it and you can't explain anything

Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
it.

> so what make you think it will be different for me?

Chickenshit. You afraid to try?

>
> Besides I did read it. It didn't make your point for you.

WHAT exactly have you read? Authors and titles.

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:08 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>> You are not a critical thinker. You are a believer. Belief is a barrier.
>>> In order to break through the barrier you have critical thinking skills
>>> and you have to practice them often. It takes years to get good at this.
>>> You aren't going to become a critical thinker by reading or by posting on usenet.
>>
>> Fascinating you should say that when you are so obsessed with Usenet that
>> you repost closed conversations and look at your own posts to up the views.
>
> If you can't explain it you don't understand it.

This is the recourse of the lazy.
If you won’t read about it, there’s no point in discussing it.

Try actual learning, Jim. Don’t be a chickenshit.

>
> Its really that simple.
>
> Usenet makes it easy for people to pretend that they understand what they only believe.
>

[James McGinn]

> > You read it and you can't explain anything
>
> Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
> it.

You got nothing!!!

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:49:48 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:08 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>> You are not a critical thinker. You are a believer. Belief is a barrier.
> >>> In order to break through the barrier you have critical thinking skills
> >>> and you have to practice them often. It takes years to get good at this.
> >>> You aren't going to become a critical thinker by reading or by posting on usenet.
> >>
> >> Fascinating you should say that when you are so obsessed with Usenet that
> >> you repost closed conversations and look at your own posts to up the views.
> >
> > If you can't explain it you don't understand it.
>
> This is the recourse of the lazy.
> If you won’t read about it, there’s no point in discussing it.
>
> Try actual learning, Jim. Don’t be a chickenshit.

You got nothing.

[Odd Bodkin]

If you’re going to have a screaming fit in the grocery store, we’ll just
take you out to the parking lot until you collect yourself.

[Odd Bodkin]

Jim, I get the history. Learning involves putting yourself in the position
of student, in a somewhat subservient contract with a teacher who has two
jobs: first to present the material and Guidas practice; second to judge
how well the student has learned.

People who have fragile egos and who mask that with bluster and arrogance
find the second part of that contract unappealing, because they are more
afraid of failure than they are excited about learning something new. So
they do things like go to discussion forums, where the presumption is that
everyone is on a level playing field, with no subservience involved, and
then the challenge issued is: prove you know what you’re talking about by
explaining it to me. Where this goes astray is when this escalates into
“You owe me this.”

No. If you want to discuss something with any depth, then you have to learn
the basics first. This means putting yourself in that subservient, judged
position until you have the basics down. If you don’t do that, no one will
give you the time of day, and you’ll be pegged immediately as a
know-nothing blowhard.

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 11:10:35 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> Jim, I get the history. Learning involves putting yourself in the position
> of student, in a somewhat subservient contract with a teacher who has two
> jobs: first to present the material and Guidas practice; second to judge
> how well the student has learned.

Let's get started then. I read the material. Now what?

I await your instruction oh teacher.

[Odd Bodkin]

What material SPECIFICALLY have you read?

>
> I await your instruction oh teacher.
>
>

[James McGinn]

You got nothing!!!

[Serg io]

On 1/23/2018 1:10 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
>>>
>>> Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
>>> it.
>>
>> You got nothing!!!
>>
>
> If you’re going to have a screaming fit in the grocery store, we’ll just
> take you out to the parking lot until you collect yourself.
>

...must be spoon feeding time for bb McGinn, again...


McGinn,

if there is no water vapor in the air because you cannot see it, then
is there Argon gas in the air ?

[Serg io]

[ suggest McGinn buy a set of feeding spoons, and a bib. ]

[Serg io]

On 1/23/2018 12:47 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 7:27:08 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, January 22, 2018 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, there’s your problem right there. That’s not how science works, and
>>>>> nobody cares about your gut level instincts or your aesthetics.
>>>>
>>>> Like you have a clue. Only a retard would come to a science forum claim
>>>> they know something then refuse to explain it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That’s a rather desperate and childish gesture of manipulation, Jim.
>>> As I said, a NORMAL person who wanted to know answers would read up on the
>>> subject and not just look at the pictures.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>
>> You got nothing!
>>
>
> Sure looks like a 4 year old sulking to me.
>

McGinn got angry, his post is very short.

[James McGinn]

LOL. You got nothing!!!

[James McGinn]

Nothing!!!

[James McGinn]

Very few people can tell the difference between what they believe and what they understand. That means the world is full of people that think they understand certain notions but actually only believe these notions. Typically these people make the conceptual error of looking to crowd to determine truth. But what they don't understand is that everybody in the crowd is doing the same thing they are doing. So what you end up with collective stupidity.

The crowd tends to accept as true many notions that are actually nonsense. Most people don't have the critical thinking skill to recognize the difference between what they believe and what they genuinely understand. The only way to get through to these people is to put them on the spot and try to get them to explain what they claim they understand. They will come up with all kinds of increasingly absurd excuses for why they can't explain what they believe they understand. When they have exhausted all excuses they ultimately come back to the crowd.

The crowd tends to believe stupid things because the crowd tends to conform to the lowest common denominator of what is easiest to believe.

[James McGinn]

Go ahead. I read it all.

Put up or shut up, you lying son of a bitch.

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > You read it and you can't explain anything
>
> Won’t, not can’t.

You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.

You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open to interpretation. You have the mind of a five year old.

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > You read it and you can't explain anything
>
> Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
> it.

Your a moron who doesn't understand shit. Like all science groupies you start from the assumption that everything conventional is true and you hope nobody puts on you the spot.

People with low self-esteem come to usenet because it is so easy to create the illusion that you are smarter than you are. This is why there are some many retard trolls here like you, Penal, and Sergio. None of you fools can even answer simple question. None of you fools do anything but restate conventional notions that any idiot can look up on the internet.

[James McGinn]

Address the issue, you worthless piece of shit!

[Odd Bodkin]

So you have read NOTHING???

And you want to start from scratch, learning the basics ON USENET?

Let me remind you. This is a discussion forum. In order to discuss, you
must FIRST be acquainted with the basics, or you will be laughed out of the
house. To get acquainted with the basics, you must put yourself in position
of student OUTSIDE of Usenet. If you don’t want to deal with a human being
teacher, you can go to the library, sit in there, and read a bunch of books
on your own to get acquainted with the basics.

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 6:56:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > You got nothing!!!
> >
>
> So you have read NOTHING???
>
> And you want to start from scratch, learning the basics ON USENET?
>
> Let me remind you. This is a discussion forum. In order to discuss, you
> must FIRST be acquainted with the basics, or you will be laughed out of the
> house. To get acquainted with the basics, you must put yourself in position
> of student OUTSIDE of Usenet. If you don’t want to deal with a human being
> teacher, you can go to the library, sit in there, and read a bunch of books
> on your own to get acquainted with the basics.

I told you a read it, you lying son of a bitch. You are just a desperate science groupy. You don't understand shit.

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
>>
>> Won’t, not can’t.
>
> You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.
>
> You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open
> to interpretation.

You certainly can’t just look at one and tell what it’s conveying. You have
to read about that.

You’re a case in point.

> You have the mind of a five year old.
>

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 6:56:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>> You got nothing!!!
>>>
>>
>> So you have read NOTHING???
>>
>> And you want to start from scratch, learning the basics ON USENET?
>>
>> Let me remind you. This is a discussion forum. In order to discuss, you
>> must FIRST be acquainted with the basics, or you will be laughed out of the
>> house. To get acquainted with the basics, you must put yourself in position
>> of student OUTSIDE of Usenet. If you don’t want to deal with a human being
>> teacher, you can go to the library, sit in there, and read a bunch of books
>> on your own to get acquainted with the basics.
>
> I told you a read it,

Read WHAT, you evasive twat?
Authors and titles.

And you’re calling OTHERS liars when you are the one lying through your
teeth?

What does that tell you about your mental state?

> you lying son of a bitch. You are just a desperate science groupy. You
> don't understand shit.
>
>

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
>>
>> Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
>> it.
>
> Your a moron who doesn't understand shit.

I’m aware you’re going to delude yourself with that lie in perpetuity.
You somehow believe that education by reading is counterproductive.

> Like all science groupies you start from the assumption that everything
> conventional is true and you hope nobody puts on you the spot.
>
> People with low self-esteem come to usenet because it is so easy to
> create the illusion that you are smarter than you are. This is why there
> are some many retard trolls here like you, Penal, and Sergio. None of you
> fools can even answer simple question. None of you fools do anything but
> restate conventional notions that any idiot can look up on the internet.
>

[Odd Bodkin]

Like WHAT specifically?
You’re aware you’ve been avoiding answering this for days?

>
> Put up or shut up, you lying son of a bitch.
>
> James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
>

[Serg io]

[ update: McGinn exposed to reason, is now cornered and exposed as a
"know nothing", McGinn has melted down completly, + resorts to swaring
like a wounded pussy. ]

[Serg io]

On 1/25/2018 10:42 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:

McGinn, how does your shirt dry ?

it gets the plasmas ?? HA....

what a dufus,

McGinn's missing "cold steam" (google FOG)

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>> You read it and you can't explain anything
> >>
> >> Won’t, not can’t.
> >
> > You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.
> >
> > You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open
> > to interpretation.
>
> You certainly can’t just look at one and tell what it’s conveying.

LOL. So we need a priest from the religion of meteorology to interpret it for us?

No thank you. I will pass on that stupidity. The phase diagram is the only reliable evidence we have.

It's the naivete of you fucking science groupies and your brain-dead tendency to believe whatever the crowd believes that is the biggest obstacle to scientific progress.

IOW, its the collective effect of billions of brain-dead retards like yourself that make it easy for meteorologist to pretend like they understand what they only believe.

Meteorological theory is pretentious BS that conforms to the lowest common denominator of what people generally assume.

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 6:56:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>> You got nothing!!!
> >>>
> >>
> >> So you have read NOTHING???
> >>
> >> And you want to start from scratch, learning the basics ON USENET?
> >>
> >> Let me remind you. This is a discussion forum. In order to discuss, you
> >> must FIRST be acquainted with the basics, or you will be laughed out of the
> >> house. To get acquainted with the basics, you must put yourself in position
> >> of student OUTSIDE of Usenet. If you don’t want to deal with a human being
> >> teacher, you can go to the library, sit in there, and read a bunch of books
> >> on your own to get acquainted with the basics.
> >
> > I told you a read it,
>
> Read WHAT, you evasive twat?
> Authors and titles.
>
> And you’re calling OTHERS liars when you are the one lying through your
> teeth?
>
> What does that tell you about your mental state?

If it is any consolation I will allow you to make a retraction.

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> >>> You read it and you can't explain anything
> >>
> >> Won’t, not can’t. I won’t because there is essential value in you reading
> >> it.
> >
> > Your a moron who doesn't understand shit.
>
> I’m aware you’re going to delude yourself with that lie in perpetuity.
> You somehow believe that education by reading is counterproductive.

You got nothing!!!

[James McGinn]

I read what you suggested upthread, you evasive jackass. Reread your comments upthread, dumbass.

> You’re aware you’ve been avoiding answering this for days?

Fuck you, you lying asshole.

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
>>>>
>>>> Won’t, not can’t.
>>>
>>> You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.
>>>
>>> You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open
>>> to interpretation.
>>
>> You certainly can’t just look at one and tell what it’s conveying.
>
> LOL. So we need a priest from the religion of meteorology to interpret it for us?

You need SOMEONE to explain it to you. You can’t just LOOK at it and tell
what it means. You’ve demonstrated amply that this does not work.

>
> No thank you. I will pass on that stupidity. The phase diagram is the
> only reliable evidence we have.

But not what you mistakenly believe it means. It does not mean what you
think it does, nor will you even try to read about what it means.

You WANT to be able to just look at the picture and understand what it
means. Well, tough shit. You can’t. You can’t make true what you WANT to be
true.

Face facts Jim. You CAN’T discern the facts from a picture. You have to
read.

Now then....what problem exactly do you have with reading?

>
> It's the naivete of you fucking science groupies and your brain-dead
> tendency to believe whatever the crowd believes that is the biggest
> obstacle to scientific progress.
>
> IOW, its the collective effect of billions of brain-dead retards like
> yourself that make it easy for meteorologist to pretend like they
> understand what they only believe.
>
> Meteorological theory is pretentious BS that conforms to the lowest
> common denominator of what people generally assume.
>

[Odd Bodkin]

Direct questions evaded clumsily. You have no excuse.

[Odd Bodkin]

What BOOKS have you read, Jim? Authors and titles.
What have you read other than Usenet?
If ALL you have read has come from Internet forums, then say that. It will
explain it all.

> Reread your comments upthread, dumbass.
>
>> You’re aware you’ve been avoiding answering this for days?
>
> Fuck you, you lying asshole.
>

[Earle Jones]

On 2018-01-25 17:38:15 +0000, Odd Bodkin said:

> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
>>>>>
>>>>> Won’t, not can’t.
>>>>
>>>> You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.
>>>>
>>>> You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open
>>>> to interpretation.
>>>
>>> You certainly can’t just look at one and tell what it’s conveying.
>>
>> LOL. So we need a priest from the religion of meteorology to interpret
>> it for us?
>
> You need SOMEONE to explain it to you. You can’t just LOOK at it and tell
> what it means. You’ve demonstrated amply that this does not work.
>
>>
>> No thank you. I will pass on that stupidity. The phase diagram is the
>> only reliable evidence we have.
>
> But not what you mistakenly believe it means. It does not mean what you
> think it does, nor will you even try to read about what it means.
>
> You WANT to be able to just look at the picture and understand what it
> means. Well, tough shit. You can’t. You can’t make true what you WANT to be
> true.
>
> Face facts Jim. You CAN’T discern the facts from a picture. You have to

> read.....

*
But a picture is worth a thousand words!

earle
*

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 9:38:19 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 8:42:20 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> You read it and you can't explain anything
> >>>>
> >>>> Won’t, not can’t.
> >>>
> >>> You can't because you don't understand. You just believe.
> >>>
> >>> You are so fucking stupid you tried to claim that phase diagrams are open
> >>> to interpretation.
> >>
> >> You certainly can’t just look at one and tell what it’s conveying.
> >
> > LOL. So we need a priest from the religion of meteorology to interpret it for us?
>
> You need SOMEONE to explain it to you.

I wish I wuz more smartyr lyke yiew.

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 9:42:17 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> > I read what you suggested upthread, you evasive jackass.
>
> What BOOKS have you read, Jim? Authors and titles.
> What have you read other than Usenet?
> If ALL you have read has come from Internet forums, then say that. It will
> explain it all.

When it comes to science your woodworking skills really shine!!!

[Odd Bodkin]

Evasion of direct question noted, you chickenshit Internet chin-dragged.

[James McGinn]

Fuck off you petty prick.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

Run, Jim, run, as fast as you can...

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 10:18:23 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> Run, Jim, run, as fast as you can...

The reason you stupid SOB's can't make an argument is because you never really did understand any of this shit. You are just a dumb, poorly educated, believer in science. And the internet gives you false confidence that you understand what you actually only believe.

Amateurs make the mistake of assuming that the crowd can't be wrong. The reality is that everybody in the crowd uses the same, brain-dead stupid reasoning.

Crowds don't think. Crowds are comprised of people that assume that if everybody believes it then it must be true. A scientists knows that the only arbiter of truth that matters is reproducible experimental evidence.

I am a scientist. You are just another brain-dead believer. Unfortunately, science is largely dictated by millions and millions of brain-dead dumbasses just like you.

You got nothing!!!

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 10:18:23 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Run, Jim, run, as fast as you can...
>
> The reason you stupid SOB's can't make an argument is because you never
> really did understand any of this shit. You are just a dumb, poorly
> educated, believer in science. And the internet gives you false
> confidence that you understand what you actually only believe.
>
> Amateurs make the mistake of assuming that the crowd can't be wrong. The
> reality is that everybody in the crowd uses the same, brain-dead stupid reasoning.
>
> Crowds don't think. Crowds are comprised of people that assume that if
> everybody believes it then it must be true. A scientists knows that the
> only arbiter of truth that matters is reproducible experimental evidence.
>
> I am a scientist.

Who hasn’t read a damn thing other than internet discussions?

>You are just another brain-dead believer. Unfortunately, science is
> largely dictated by millions and millions of brain-dead dumbasses just like you.
>
> You got nothing!!!
>

[James McGinn]

Go to hell, you fucking worthless troll.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

Dumbfuck McGinn erroneously claimed...

"I am a scientist..."

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Actual scientists perform experimemts and collect data through observations, etc. You, Jim, have zero observations and/or experiments to present in support of your own completely whacky theories, which fly in the face of mainstream physics, which are backed up mightily by innumerable observations and experimemts.

You should know by now how science actually works, Jim, unless you are completely incapable of learning; the guy who declares a theory to be wrong is the guy who needs to present the evidence to prove it, and you have not, and you cannot, prove mainstream science to be wrong in these particular matters. You are no more a scientist than my dog is.

[James McGinn]

I can't even begin to imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure you are right and so completely unable to say how or why. Don't lose hope. Take solace in the fact that there are millions of other brain-dead retards just like yourself who believe as you do. Millions of people can't be wrong, can they?

Millions of people believe in ghosts.
Millions of people believe in Bigfoot.
Millions of people believe in flying saucers.
Millions of people believe in God.
Millions of people believe in heaven and hell.
Millions of people believe the light stays on when the refrigerator door is closed.
Millions of people believe a miniscule amount of CO2 determines the temperature of the atmosphere.
Millions of people believe in 'cold steam'.

Millions of people couldn't possibly be wrong, could they? Don't lose faith. Don't lose hope. The evidence has just got to be out there, somewhere. Surely somebody will stumble across it. Right?

Keep your head up.

[Odd Bodkin]

Tch tch, such hostility from someone afraid of a block of paper and
cardboard.

[James McGinn]

Quack quack.

[Serg io]

mis-directed toward others,
McGinn knows that hate should be turned inwards,
as he cannot make himself read a starting science book

[James McGinn]

Why don't you whackjobs just imagine the evidence you want.

[Jeff-Relf.Me]

How is James McGinn's "Scientists are BrainDead" premise USEFUL to him ?

Everyone is a (biased) advocate of one thing or other.
(Biased) Premises only need be useful, not truthy.

" science is largely dictated by millions and millions of brain-dead dumbasses ",
says James McGinn.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

McGinn chirped...

"Why don't you whackjobs just imagine the evidence you want."

Jim, since you are the biggest whack job here it only makes sense that you imagine the most evidence of anyone! But then, you don't actually have any real evidence at all, right?

[James McGinn]

The evidence is in the public domain, dumbass.

[Odd Bodkin]

But your clearly screwy understanding of the public domain phase diagram
picture isn’t.

[Serg io]

McGinn, Science is in the public domain. and so are Books.


however, McGinn's private "no water vapor in air" theory is only in his
imagination.


anyone can disprove McGinn in a second, by breathing on a mirror.


time to throw McGinn out with the dead fish bait.

[James McGinn]

Settle down. If (in contrast to what I believe) you and your fellow retards believe that evidence is open to interpretation then one can only wonder why you object to my interpretation. How is it that you are so fucking dumb you never considered this? Think about it. If you what you are saying is true then anybody who chose to interpret it as being in the solid phase would be equally valid as your brain-dead interpretation that it is gaseous phase.

Duhr!!!

How is it that none of you retards never considered this?

Dumb people tend to collective reinforce each others dumbness. And the internet has made it especially easy to find other dumb people.

It's you retards that have turned usenet into a collective nose picking contest.

Sergio wins every time!!!

[Odd Bodkin]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 12:25:50 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 10:05:04 AM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> McGinn chirped...
>>>>
>>>> "Why don't you whackjobs just imagine the evidence you want."
>>>>
>>>> Jim, since you are the biggest whack job here it only makes sense that
>>>> you imagine the most evidence of anyone! But then, you don't actually
>>>> have any real evidence at all, right?
>>>
>>> The evidence is in the public domain, dumbass.
>>>
>>
>> But your clearly screwy understanding of the public domain phase diagram
>> picture isn’t.
>
> Settle down. If (in contrast to what I believe) you and your fellow
> retards believe that evidence is open to interpretation then one can only
> wonder why you object to my interpretation. How is it that you are so
> fucking dumb you never considered this? Think about it. If you what you
> are saying is true then anybody who chose to interpret it as being in the
> solid phase would be equally valid as your brain-dead interpretation that
> it is gaseous phase.

The picture did not come down from heaven, Jim. It isn’t some Mayan
calendar stone that scientists had to interpret to figure it out.
Scientists DREW the fucking diagram, while at the same time writing words
that describes what it means. You have elected to look at the picture and
to not read the words. And you think somehow your “interpretation” of the
picture should be considered as seriously as that of the people who DREW
the diagram??

I suppose you could wander to Washington DC and “interpret” the large
monuments there without reading any of the plaques put there by those who
built the monuments. With any luck, you’ll call the Washington Monument an
ancient sundial, aligned at the summer solstice with the Statue of Liberty.


You dismiss the intelligence of the large part of people, but consider the
small fact that you are the one that can’t take care of yourself.

>
> Duhr!!!
>
> How is it that none of you retards never considered this?
>
> Dumb people tend to collective reinforce each others dumbness. And the
> internet has made it especially easy to find other dumb people.
>
> It's you retards that have turned usenet into a collective nose picking contest.
>
> Sergio wins every time!!!
>
>

[Serg io]

ha! that's ripe,
McGinn calling everyone retards because they won't just up and believe
him when he says there is no water vapor in the air. How retarded is that ?

[James McGinn]

If you weren't a retard I would not have to ask you what words you think I haven't read. You would just present the words so that rest of the retards can see what you are talking about.

I know you got nothing. But they are going to wonder.

[Odd Bodkin]

Oh I know you’re baiting me to “present” the words you haven’t read.
Something about books being more terrifying than Usenet.

>You would just present the words so that rest of the retards can see what
> you are talking about.
>
> I know you got nothing. But they are going to wonder.
>
>

[James McGinn]

You got nothing!!!

[Odd Bodkin]

What have you read? Authors, titles.

[James McGinn]

You got nothing!!!

[Serg io]

think I haven't read." -James McGinn

AnOtHeR KEEPER !!

[Odd Bodkin]

I’m certainly not going to spoon feed you anything but nothing. Come back
when you’ve read something someplace other than the internet.

[James McGinn]

Quack quack.

[Serg io]

McGinn is blockhead stubborn to the point of pure retard,
ez simulators all over the internet, show the intermixed phase of matter
you can lead a McGinn to education, but you cannot make him read.

this simulaor has a phase diagram on it with the location of the
simulation, took me 10 seconds to find it.

it even has WATER molecule...



https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/states-of-matter/latest/states-of-matter_en.html

[James McGinn]

This cartoon shows water being liquid well above 100C, you fucking mental retard.

Sergio, I have some advice for you, "never go full retard."

[Serg io]

On 1/26/2018 6:42 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 10:18:23 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Run, Jim, run, as fast as you can...
>>
>> The reason you stupid SOB's can't make an argument is because you never
>> really did understand any of this shit. You are just a dumb, poorly
>> educated, believer in science. And the internet gives you false
>> confidence that you understand what you actually only believe.
>>
>> Amateurs make the mistake of assuming that the crowd can't be wrong. The
>> reality is that everybody in the crowd uses the same, brain-dead stupid reasoning.
>>
>> Crowds don't think. Crowds are comprised of people that assume that if
>> everybody believes it then it must be true. A scientists knows that the
>> only arbiter of truth that matters is reproducible experimental evidence.
>>
>> I am a scientist.
>
> Who hasn’t read a damn thing other than internet discussions?

ok McGinn, what is the equation for partial pressure ?

[James McGinn]

On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:07:26 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> On 1/26/2018 6:42 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 10:18:23 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Run, Jim, run, as fast as you can...
> >>
> >> The reason you stupid SOB's can't make an argument is because you never
> >> really did understand any of this shit. You are just a dumb, poorly
> >> educated, believer in science. And the internet gives you false
> >> confidence that you understand what you actually only believe.
> >>
> >> Amateurs make the mistake of assuming that the crowd can't be wrong. The
> >> reality is that everybody in the crowd uses the same, brain-dead stupid reasoning.
> >>
> >> Crowds don't think. Crowds are comprised of people that assume that if
> >> everybody believes it then it must be true. A scientists knows that the
> >> only arbiter of truth that matters is reproducible experimental evidence.
> >>
> >> I am a scientist.
> >
> > Who hasn’t read a damn thing other than internet discussions?
>
> ok McGinn, what is the equation for partial pressure ?

LOL. Is that the best you can do?

[pnal...@gmail.com]

McGinn can't possibly answer that question...

[Serg io]

okk we get easier;

Ok McGinn, what is the equation for pressure ?

[James McGinn]

Well, since its impossible I guess I won't try

quack quack

[pnal...@gmail.com]

McGinn literally quacked...

"Well, since its impossible I guess I won't try"

Jim, you are SO predictable... on course you won't try, you are incapable of trying...

[James McGinn]

Flap your wings little ducky . . . And fly.

quack quack.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

Yet another no-answer from dumbfuck McGinn...

[Serg io]

yep, he has a job with Uber now, drives around dressed up in a Duck
costume


http://thumbs4.ebaystatic.com/d/l800/pict/152446739228_1.jpg

[James McGinn]

Sergio is smoking quack.