Pluto, the ex-planet
DC
In 2006, the International Astronomical Union labeled Pluto a "dwarf
planet," ending (it hoped) a controversy that began in 2000 when the
newly-designed Hayden Planetarium�s exhibit had effectively downgraded
the ninth planet. As planetarium director, Neil deGrasse Tyson was for
years bombarded with protests from Pluto lovers and in "The Pluto
Files - the Rise and Fall of America's Favorite Planet" (Amazon.com:
http://xrl.us/PlutoX ), the astrophysicist irreverently chronicles
that episode even as he provides an elegant history and analysis of
planet science and classification.
...Tyson is a columnist for Natural History, the host of "NOVA
ScienceNOW," and a regular guest on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart"
and "The Colbert Report." He spoke with us from Hayden Planetarium in
New York City...
Continued: http://xrl.us/PlutoZ
gb
wrote:
> Boston Globe
>
> In 2006, the International Astronomical Union labeled Pluto a "dwarf
> planet," ending (it hoped) a controversy that began in 2000 when the
> the ninth planet. As planetarium director, Neil deGrasse Tyson was for
> years bombarded with protests from Pluto lovers and in "The Pluto
> that episode even as he provides an elegant history and analysis of
> planet science and classification.
>
> ...Tyson is a columnist for Natural History, the host of "NOVA
> ScienceNOW," and a regular guest on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart"
> and "The Colbert Report." He spoke with us from Hayden Planetarium in
> New York City...
>
> Continued:http://xrl.us/PlutoZ
Nothing can come close to the big. WASP-17 is a planet, the largest
in its solar system with a very elliptical path crossing into the
orbits of
all other planets. Let's say WASP-17 is the largest planet in that
solar
system. How many planets are there in that solar system? Planets just
can't cancel out with logic. Pluto of course is a planet. I made the
metaphore of Snow White and the four dwarfs, because parallel
universes are strange. In that parallel universe the three smallest
dwarfs were killed, each stabbed 12 times at least. Mean scientists
existed in that parallel universe, and in that world scientists
basically
walked around with machine guns, but things in general reminded of
our universe. Ever seen Star Trek chapters like that?
gb
After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
to 9000. They bastardized their profession by a question which related
to "nothing can come close to the big", and what did they vote for on
that?
gb
Since Tyson was the one with the idea to remove Pluto as a planet,
I'll change my saying to: "Nothing can come close to the big, nothing
can come close to Tyson."
tho...@antispam.ham
> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
> to 9000.
That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
the recent General Assemblies.
Double-A
tho...@antispam.ham
>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>> to 9000.
>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>> the recent General Assemblies.
> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-david.html
Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
go down. Do you have something to say about that?
Double-A
> Double-A <double...@hush.com> writes:
> >> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
> >>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
> >>> to 9000.
> >> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
> >> the recent General Assemblies.
>
> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
Double-A
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>> to 9000.
>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da...
>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
another newsgroup. Isn't one enough?
Double-A
Oh horrors! There are two of you? Or is this just total
compartmentalization on your part?
Double-A
Darla
"Double-A" <doub...@hush.com> wrote in message
news:b5e93bb7-bbd0-4a66...@s20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
It's a good thing you don't ask David for an autograph, Double-A.
He'd probably say something like, "Let them eat cake."
Is he pee-oh'd about the Pluto reclass?
--
**** Darla
Be well and come... be welcome
You are the fifth star!
BradGuth
They clone themselves on demand.
Spooks and moles like "tho..." are here because it's their job.
~ BG
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>>>> to 9000.
>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
>> another newsgroup. =A0Isn't one enough?
> Oh horrors! There are two of you?
Well, I can see why one of the other tho...@antispam.ham posters
questions your reading comprehension skills. I said that there
is at least one other person using "tho...@antispam.ham"; I did
not say there are two of me.
> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
membership numbers.
tho...@antispam.ham
> "Double-A" <doub...@hush.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>>>>> to 9000.
>>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da...
>>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
>>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
>>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
>>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
>>> another newsgroup. Isn't one enough?
>> Oh horrors! There are two of you? Or is this just total
>> compartmentalization on your part?
> It's a good thing you don't ask David for an autograph, Double-A.
> He'd probably say something like, "Let them eat cake."
>
> Is he pee-oh'd about the Pluto reclass?
Apparently you're unaware that the "reclass" wasn't just Pluto,
but also hundreds of thousands of minor planets (or asteroids)
that can no longer be called planets, officially. Totally
unnecessary.
tho...@antispam.ham
> Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>>>>> to 9000.
>>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da...
>>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
>>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
>>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. =A0I
>>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
>>> another newsgroup. =A0Isn't one enough?
>> Oh horrors! There are two of you? Or is this just total
>> compartmentalization on your part?
> They clone themselves on demand.
>
> Spooks and moles like "tho..." are here because it's their job.
You have some proof that somebody is being paid to impersonate
others on Usenet?
Double-A
> Double-A writes:
> >>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
> >>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
> >>>>>>> to 9000.
> >>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
> >>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
> >>>>>http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
> >>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
> >>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
> >>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
> >> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
> >> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
> >> another newsgroup. =A0Isn't one enough?
> > Oh horrors! There are two of you?
>
> Well, I can see why one of the other tho...@antispam.ham posters
> questions your reading comprehension skills. I said that there
> is at least one other person using "tho...@antispam.ham"; I did
> not say there are two of me.
Yet the personality is the same. You probably just don't want to get
ramped up into full tholenizer mode while posting to astronomy groups
only.
> > Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
>
> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
> membership numbers.
The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
Double-A
Double-A
> David doesn't LOOK INSANE, DA! lmfjao!
>
> It's VERY EASY TO BE FOOLED!
>
> Saul Levy
Right, Saul. Looks can be deceiving!
Double-A
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:09:52 -0800 (PST), Double-A
> >http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da...
>
> >Double-A
Raving
> "Darla" <darlaperen...@maol.com> writes:
Call them 'spamoids' rather than 'plutoids'.
> that can no longer be called planets, officially. Totally
> unnecessary.
"SPAM is a special blend of pork shoulder with ham"
'antispam.ham' is a pleonasm. It reduces to ham.
----------------------------------------------------------
... antispam.ham ... <---> http://tinyurl.com/ye3vpgo
I am confused by the direction/irony of "this"
Darla
<tho...@antispam.ham> wrote in message news:hg7o1s$279$2...@aioe.org...
I agree.
Many disagree with us to the point of reclassification.
The debate is not yet over.
"Planet" has always been a very general term with a fascinating "evolution".
The present reclassification was perhaps required by some scientists who
were intensely studying TNOs; however, it is incomprehensible that such a
dramatic type of reclassification was needed just to save a little data
collating time.
Pluto may not be the planet that Lowell, Pickering, Tombaugh and company
expected it to be, yet this does not and never will take away from the
amazing search for and discovery of Pluto, the ninth planet.
I will admit that the findings of Pluto's satellites and the Kuiper belt
objects were also fascinating to observe!
Do keep looking.
There's lots more.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>>>>>> to 9000.
>>>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
>>>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>>>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
>>>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
>>>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
>>>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
>>>> another newsgroup. Isn't one enough?
>>> Oh horrors! There are two of you?
>> Well, I can see why one of the other tho...@antispam.ham posters
>> questions your reading comprehension skills. I said that there
>> is at least one other person using "tho...@antispam.ham"; I did
>> not say there are two of me.
> Yet the personality is the same.
Let me guess: when you try to impersonate someone else, you use a
completely different personality from the one you're trying to
impersonate, right?
> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
the distribution list yet?
>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
>> membership numbers.
> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
As expected, another non sequitur.
Double-A
> Double-A writes:
> >>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
> >>>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
> >>>>>>>>> to 9000.
> >>>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
> >>>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
> >>>>>>>http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
> >>>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
> >>>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
> >>>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
> >>>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
> >>>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
> >>>> another newsgroup. Isn't one enough?
> >>> Oh horrors! There are two of you?
> >> Well, I can see why one of the other tho...@antispam.ham posters
> >> questions your reading comprehension skills. I said that there
> >> is at least one other person using "tho...@antispam.ham"; I did
> >> not say there are two of me.
> > Yet the personality is the same.
>
> Let me guess: when you try to impersonate someone else, you use a
> completely different personality from the one you're trying to
> impersonate, right?
But it is not easy. Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
> > You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
> > mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
>
> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
> the distribution list yet?
I never do that! The Google limit is five.
> >>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
> >> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
> >> membership numbers.
> > The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
>
> As expected, another non sequitur.
But enquiring minds would like to know!
Double-A
BradGuth
99.9% of Usenet/newsgroup contributors are not who they claim, nor
represent whatever they suggest (including yourself).
~ BG
Double-A
Well, at least your personality is easy to recognise, whether you
choose to sock up or not!
Double-A
Nightcrawler
> BradGuth<brad...@gmail.com> writes:
>> They clone themselves on demand.
>>
>> Spooks and moles like "tho..." are here because it's their job.
>
> You have some proof that somebody is being paid to impersonate
> others on Usenet?
>
I don't know about financial reward, but Guthball impersonates a
rational, sentient hominid.
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
I doubt that Google Groups would let me create a posting account
using someone else's email address.
Wouldn't Tholen discover/reject someone creating such an account
using his email address ? Neither Google nor Tholen would allow it.
Were “tholen @ifa.hawaii.edu” itself bogus,
the University of Hawaii would cancel it.
Apparently, Tholen has used Google Groups to semi·automatically
flood the “Comp.OS.Os2.Advocacy” news·group.
Google periodically makes him prove that he's human, of course.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> BradGuth<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> They clone themselves on demand.
>>>
>>> Spooks and moles like "tho..." are here because it's their job.
>> You have some proof that somebody is being paid to impersonate
>> others on Usenet?
> I don't know about financial reward, but Guthball impersonates a
> rational, sentient hominid.
Where?
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> After Pluto and the two dwarf planets passed it were made not planets,
>>>>>>>>>>> the members of the International Astronomical Union dropped from 12000
>>>>>>>>>>> to 9000.
>>>>>>>>>> That's not true. Membership in the IAU has increased during each of
>>>>>>>>>> the recent General Assemblies.
>>>>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
>>>>>>>> Non sequitur. The issue is the membership of the IAU. It did not
>>>>>>>> go down. Do you have something to say about that?
>>>>>>> It supports the credability of the source. (You, Tholen!) Sheesh!
>>>>>> I hardly need you and your URL to support my credability [sic]. I
>>>>>> know that you've been playing around with a tho...@antispam.ham in
>>>>>> another newsgroup. Isn't one enough?
>>>>> Oh horrors! There are two of you?
>>>> Well, I can see why one of the other tho...@antispam.ham posters
>>>> questions your reading comprehension skills. I said that there
>>>> is at least one other person using "tho...@antispam.ham"; I did
>>>> not say there are two of me.
>>> Yet the personality is the same.
>> Let me guess: when you try to impersonate someone else, you use a
>> completely different personality from the one you're trying to
>> impersonate, right?
> But it is not easy.
What's so hard about using a completely different personality?
> Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
personality as someone might identify a person via their
handwriting?
>>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
>>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
>> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
>> the distribution list yet?
> I never do that! The Google limit is five.
You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
>>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
>>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
>>>> membership numbers.
>>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
>> As expected, another non sequitur.
> But enquiring minds would like to know!
And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
regardless of its relevance, right?
Nightcrawler
>>> You have some proof that somebody is being paid to impersonate
>>> others on Usenet?
>
>> I don't know about financial reward, but Guthball impersonates a
>> rational, sentient hominid.
>
> Where?
I was being generous. Please forgive my errant, philanthropic gesture.
BradGuth
It's well known that folks in charge have their spooks and moles hard
at work, cloaked as pretend-Atheists and brown-nosed clowns having no
political affiliations (much like yourself).
~ BG
Double-A
Hard to keep it up for very long.
> > Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
>
> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
> personality as someone might identify a person via their
> handwriting?
Years on Usenet have made me fairly adept.
> >>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
> >>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
> >> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
> >> the distribution list yet?
> > I never do that! The Google limit is five.
>
> You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
Yes I have, but you can tell that I haven't in any recent
conversations with you by looking at the headers.
> >>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
> >>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
> >>>> membership numbers.
> >>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
> >> As expected, another non sequitur.
> > But enquiring minds would like to know!
>
> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
> regardless of its relevance, right?
Never mind. Jeff and I figured it out from looking at your headers.
No one would use the IBM NewsReader unless they were using OS/2!
Double-A
Nightcrawler
> It's well known that folks in charge have their spooks and moles hard
> at work, cloaked as pretend-Atheists and brown-nosed clowns having no
> political affiliations (much like yourself).
Yes, and the greatest thing is we all talk amongst ourselves and
conspire to thwart your every move. I just emailed Tholen and we've
come up with the perfect plan to counter you revealing our hidden
agenda, but we want to discuss it first at our annual X-mas party
for Zionazi Jew Republicans.
Double-A
I think we finally have the Guthball cornered, fellas!
Double-A
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
Nonsense; not nearly as hard as trying to maintain the
personality of the person you're trying to impersonate.
Usually the personality of the impersonator leaks through
eventually.
>>> Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
>> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
>> personality as someone might identify a person via their
>> handwriting?
> Years on Usenet have made me fairly adept.
Doubtful, considering how your years on Usenet haven't made you any
more able to stay on topic, which happens to be the membership total
of the IAU, something that you still haven't addressed.
>>>>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
>>>>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
>>>> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
>>>> the distribution list yet?
>>> I never do that! The Google limit is five.
>> You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
> Yes I have, but you can tell that I haven't in any recent
> conversations with you by looking at the headers.
Apparently you're still assuming that the "recent conversations"
you've had in another newsgroup was with me, as opposed to
someone simply impersonating me.
>>>>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
>>>>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
>>>>>> membership numbers.
>>>>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
>>>> As expected, another non sequitur.
>>> But enquiring minds would like to know!
>> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
>> regardless of its relevance, right?
> Never mind. Jeff and I figured it out from looking at your headers.
What took so long? Interesting that you've partnered yourself with
Jeff.
> No one would use the IBM NewsReader unless they were using OS/2!
Obviously, given that it doesn't run on other platforms. But
headers can be faked.
tho...@antispam.ham
> BradGuth wrote:
>> It's well known that folks in charge have their spooks and moles hard
>> at work, cloaked as pretend-Atheists and brown-nosed clowns having no
>> political affiliations (much like yourself).
> Yes, and the greatest thing is we all talk amongst ourselves and
> conspire to thwart your every move. I just emailed Tholen
Which one? I've not received anything from you, nor am I interested
in receiving anything from you.
> and we've
> come up with the perfect plan to counter you revealing our hidden
> agenda, but we want to discuss it first at our annual X-mas party
> for Zionazi Jew Republicans.
Yeah, right.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>> Spooks and moles like "tho..." are here because it's their job.
>> You have some proof that somebody is being paid to impersonate
>> others on Usenet?
> It's well known that folks in charge have their spooks and moles hard
> at work, cloaked as pretend-Atheists and brown-nosed clowns having no
> political affiliations (much like yourself).
What makes you think I have no political affiliation?
Nightcrawler
> Yeah, right.
My apologies if you did not understand.
Raving
- Contingent upon what is meant by 'personality'.
For me: 'personality' = 'Point Of View'
- Contingent upon the accuracy and constancy of the adopted persona.
>
> > Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
>
> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
> personality as someone might identify a person via their
> handwriting?
Yes, I can do that somewhat but it is hard work and not always
possible for me to do. For example, it has taken me weeks, months and
years (off and on) to figure out your POV. Only *now* is your POV
overtly apparent to me. I doubt that there are many people who are
explicitly aware of it.
Do you *explicitly* know your own point of view?
- Knowing your POV is one thing. Being able to express your POV in a
clear, concise, remarkable manner is difficult for me to do. I want to
just go ahead and 'blurt' it out but ....
(I will express it presently .. it is truly demanding & stressful to
force it into overt explicitness.)
> > But enquiring minds would like to know!
>
> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
> regardless of its relevance, right?
Earlier you wrote ...
"> What's so hard about using a completely different personality?"
Respectfully ( ... not intended as sarcasm, nor ridicule ...) you are
making a 'classic erroneous presupposition'. You are projecting your
own POV, your own ability, your own sensibilities onto others.
You are presuming that others are aware, capable, sensitized,
experienced in a manner which is the same as yourself.
'Projection' is mainly universal and inescapable. A person spends
their lifetime perceiving reality from a constant, familiar, habitual,
personal, 'point of view'.
Your POV is very much involved with identifying and recognizing the
'target-of-focus'. ("This" is your POV)
Given that 'personality' is much to do about how a 'target-of-focus'
is perceived, you do it easily and well. You presume that others do
the same. They do not do so.
Double-A
So what personalities are leaking through from your impersonators?
> >>> Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
> >> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
> >> personality as someone might identify a person via their
> >> handwriting?
> > Years on Usenet have made me fairly adept.
>
> Doubtful, considering how your years on Usenet haven't made you any
> more able to stay on topic, which happens to be the membership total
> of the IAU, something that you still haven't addressed.
Then I should change the heading of the thread? OK!
> >>>>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
> >>>>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
> >>>> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
> >>>> the distribution list yet?
> >>> I never do that! The Google limit is five.
> >> You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
> > Yes I have, but you can tell that I haven't in any recent
> > conversations with you by looking at the headers.
>
> Apparently you're still assuming that the "recent conversations"
> you've had in another newsgroup was with me, as opposed to
> someone simply impersonating me.
Have you evidence that the Tholen of comp.os.os2.advocacy is an
impostor?
> >>>>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
> >>>>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
> >>>>>> membership numbers.
> >>>>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
> >>>> As expected, another non sequitur.
> >>> But enquiring minds would like to know!
> >> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
> >> regardless of its relevance, right?
> > Never mind. Jeff and I figured it out from looking at your headers.
>
> What took so long? Interesting that you've partnered yourself with
> Jeff.
The hacker knows a thing or two!
> > No one would use the IBM NewsReader unless they were using OS/2!
>
> Obviously, given that it doesn't run on other platforms. But
> headers can be faked.
Glad you confirmed that. But you wouldn't be faking your own headers
on the very post to which I'm replying, would you?
Double-A
eeon
Raving
For 'personality' = {POV ,perspective, stand point, ...}
...the 'trait' is singular, individual, personal and constant.
It might be likened to the reliable, unique distinctiveness of a
'finger print'.
A person's POV/perspective seems to be an extremely specific, intense,
narrow, constant, frequently recurring trait.
Cognition might be complex but a person's POV is simple, intense and
constant.
For example, each of Prof. Tholen's thoughts .. be they single words,
small groupings of words, sentences, aggregates of sentences (i.e. at
many scales - fractal ) ...
... everything that Prof. Tholen says, every thought is of the form:
''target-of-focus' (TOF for short)
------------------------------------------------------------------
> Nonsense; not nearly as hard as trying to maintain the
> personality of the person you're trying to impersonate.
> Usually the personality of the impersonator leaks through
> eventually.
----------------------------------------------------------------
> Nonsense; (!TOF)
> not nearly (!TOF)
> not nearly as hard ( rejecting 'Off Topic', seeking TOF)
> as hard as trying ( seeking TOF)
> hard as trying to maintain ( emphasizing TOF)
> maintain the personality ( identifying and tracking TOF)
> personality of the person (TOF of the TOF)
> Nonsense; not nearly as hard as trying to maintain the
> personality of the person you're trying to impersonate. (Assuming TOF)
Etc, etc. (I can continue the demonstration. Any material written by
you will suffice.)
What I hope i am doing is to demonstrate that what you express, AND
the manner by which you consider,....
.... constantly, explicitly, intensively pertains to Target-Of-
Focus.
This is your point of view. It is the perspective that you adopt when
you perceive with your awareness.
Every person personally and individually uses their own constant-
explicit-intense posture-standpoint for approaching reality.
In truth, it is apt to be impossible otherwise.
This individual POV serves as a very sharp 'notch filter'. It pre-
processes awareness. It ensures that all considerations can be
aligned, ordered and ranked with the use of a common, stable, enduring
measure.
tho...@antispam.ham
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gb <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://spaceurope.blogspot.com/2007/10/plutos-family-portrait-with-da
You're the one observing personalities, or at least trying to. I
have better things to do with my time.
>>>>> Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
>>>> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
>>>> personality as someone might identify a person via their
>>>> handwriting?
>>> Years on Usenet have made me fairly adept.
>> Doubtful, considering how your years on Usenet haven't made you any
>> more able to stay on topic, which happens to be the membership total
>> of the IAU, something that you still haven't addressed.
> Then I should change the heading of the thread? OK!
Just because you can rip the cover off of National Geographic and
replace it with a Sports Illustrated cover doesn't suddenly make
the content about sports.
>>>>>>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
>>>>>>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
>>>>>> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
>>>>>> the distribution list yet?
>>>>> I never do that! The Google limit is five.
>>>> You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
>>> Yes I have, but you can tell that I haven't in any recent
>>> conversations with you by looking at the headers.
>> Apparently you're still assuming that the "recent conversations"
>> you've had in another newsgroup was with me, as opposed to
>> someone simply impersonating me.
> Have you evidence that the Tholen of comp.os.os2.advocacy is an
> impostor?
Of course. Anything posted there by tho...@antispam.ham but not
written by me is obviously an imposter.
>>>>>>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
>>>>>>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
>>>>>>>> membership numbers.
>>>>>>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
>>>>>> As expected, another non sequitur.
>>>>> But enquiring minds would like to know!
>>>> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
>>>> regardless of its relevance, right?
>>> Never mind. Jeff and I figured it out from looking at your headers.
>> What took so long? Interesting that you've partnered yourself with
>> Jeff.
> The hacker knows a thing or two!
Like how to post to Usenet. I'm not impressed.
>>> No one would use the IBM NewsReader unless they were using OS/2!
>> Obviously, given that it doesn't run on other platforms. But
>> headers can be faked.
> Glad you confirmed that. But you wouldn't be faking your own headers
> on the very post to which I'm replying, would you?
You changed your own header.
tho...@antispam.ham
>> Yeah, right.
> My apologies if you did not understand.
The key word here is "if". I understood all too well.
BradGuth
That sounds like a good plan.
~ BG
BradGuth
You mean like those dark corners within your storage unit that gets
illegally used as your habitat?
~ BG
BradGuth
I give them an 'A' (5 gold stars) for the effort.
~ BG
BradGuth
Most folks here are quite bogus and otherwise pretending at most
everything they claim to represent. I just figured that you were one
of the usual pack or swarm. However, if you like I'll take you off my
NO-FLY list.
~ BG
Raving
If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must
be a duck, right?
It's either a duck or an impersonator fraudulently misrepresenting
itself as a duck. That is what makes fraud such a difficult crime to
deal with. People are provided with what is expected. They only take
notice when a 'duck' doesn't walk, nor perchance 'talk', nor perchance
look like a duck. In such circumstances, their suspicions are raised.
>
> Just because you can rip the cover off of National Geographic and
> replace it with a Sports Illustrated cover doesn't suddenly make
> the content about sports.
You must be relying upon 'bleed through'.
Double-A
We spooks are above such legal considerations. You know that.
Double-A
Double-A
Tholen was recruited through his NASA assignment. We may pretend to
argue, but all us government spooks are really on the same team, you
know! Watch your step.
Double-A
Nightcrawler
> The key word here is "if". I understood all too well.
>
Sure you did.
Double-A
You wouldn't seem to, what with all the time you spend on Usenet.
>
> >>>>> Subtle things give a person's true identity away.
> >>>> You're claiming to be as adept at identifying people via their
> >>>> personality as someone might identify a person via their
> >>>> handwriting?
> >>> Years on Usenet have made me fairly adept.
> >> Doubtful, considering how your years on Usenet haven't made you any
> >> more able to stay on topic, which happens to be the membership total
> >> of the IAU, something that you still haven't addressed.
> > Then I should change the heading of the thread? OK!
>
> Just because you can rip the cover off of National Geographic and
> replace it with a Sports Illustrated cover doesn't suddenly make
> the content about sports.
Unless it was about sports to begin with.
> >>>>>>> You probably just don't want to get ramped up into full tholenizer
> >>>>>>> mode while posting to astronomy groups only.
> >>>>>> You mean you haven't added a half dozen irrelevant newsgroups to
> >>>>>> the distribution list yet?
> >>>>> I never do that! The Google limit is five.
> >>>> You've never used another entry point to Usenet?
> >>> Yes I have, but you can tell that I haven't in any recent
> >>> conversations with you by looking at the headers.
> >> Apparently you're still assuming that the "recent conversations"
> >> you've had in another newsgroup was with me, as opposed to
> >> someone simply impersonating me.
> > Have you evidence that the Tholen of comp.os.os2.advocacy is an
> > impostor?
>
> Of course. Anything posted there by tho...@antispam.ham but not
> written by me is obviously an imposter. (sic)
Can you prove your whereabouts elsewhere at the time those posts were
being made?
> >>>>>>>>> Or is this just total compartmentalization on your part?
> >>>>>>>> I can tell that you have no interest in the issue of the IAU's
> >>>>>>>> membership numbers.
> >>>>>>> The real question is: Do you really still use OS/2?
> >>>>>> As expected, another non sequitur.
> >>>>> But enquiring minds would like to know!
> >>>> And everyone must answer every enquiry your mind can conjure up,
> >>>> regardless of its relevance, right?
> >>> Never mind. Jeff and I figured it out from looking at your headers.
> >> What took so long? Interesting that you've partnered yourself with
> >> Jeff.
> > The hacker knows a thing or two!
>
> Like how to post to Usenet. I'm not impressed.
Like how to write his own newsreader program.
> >>> No one would use the IBM NewsReader unless they were using OS/2!
> >> Obviously, given that it doesn't run on other platforms. But
> >> headers can be faked.
> > Glad you confirmed that. But you wouldn't be faking your own headers
> > on the very post to which I'm replying, would you?
>
> You changed your own header.
I did? What did I change?
Double-A