On Thu, 23 May 2013 11:59:19 -0700, Dutch <
n...@email.com> wrote:
>>The question was directed to you but I guess if you want me to answer
>>on your behalf I shall. Yes, you and Goobs pay an inordinate amount of
>>attention to what Dave says. Almost an obsession.
>
>No, my question was directed to you. Your non-answer is enough.
He gave you an answer. It's another answer you happen to dislike, but he
gave you one. He also challenged you to attempt to explain how the Gooberdoodle
thinks he now knows what he claims can't be known. You have cowardly wussed away
from his challenge by changing the subject. Try putting your wussile ineptitude
asside for a few seconds and try to explain HOW you want people to think the
Goober found out that which he also claims can not be known. Go:
>You are
>obsessed with ...[the stupid Goober],
He and I both want to know how you Goos want people to think that Goo
himself learn that which can not be known. Rupert is probably somewhat curious
about it himself but doesn't want to say so because he has tried to claim that
he found out too, if I remember correctly. He might be ashamed of himself for
it, as well he should be.
>admit it. Why else would you be doing all the
>ankle-biting?
Do you and Goo both fantasise over guys' ankles and assholes, or is Goo just
an asshole guy? I'm just being polite you know, showing some "interest" in you
guys' stupid obsessions. You should try to get over this binge and let it go
really.
What would be far more interesting is how Goo learned the unlearnable and
how you unlearned the obvious. How did Goo learn what non-existence is "like",
and how did you unlearn appreciation for when animals experience lives of
positive value???