Peter Saly--an expose
ramalane
/ramalane
--
Alt.Hackers.Malicious Survival Guide
http://www.ramalane.com
Ford Prefect
"ramalane" <rama...@cotse.com> wrote in message
news:iVWF7.22004$jP3.6...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
Very creative rama.
;-p
Ford...
Peter S. Saly
"ramalane" <rama...@cotse.com> wrote in message
news:iVWF7.22004$jP3.6...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
By the style and subject of these posts, rama-lame is definitely an escapee
from middle school.
Grow up !.
Peter S. Saly
"Ford Prefect" <donteventhin...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JxXF7.2802$cP6.97...@radon.golden.net...
Yeah..
The kiddies are still into kindergarden level line-drawings..
Oh well.
They do have to keep themselves busy..
Ford Prefect
"Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com> wrote in message
news:tugi4fo...@corp.supernews.com...
I refuse to lower myself to your level.
However, I have no problem lowering myself to rama's level for it's still
way above the likes of you.
'nuff said.
Ford...
Joskyn ®
wrote:
So what, are you jealous that you never passed kindergarten?
>I WANT TO Grow up !.
>
You said it geezer
Joskyn
Peter S. Saly
My level is way above attacks that involved
accusations of homosexuality and bestiality,
stick cartoon drawings,
pornographic pictures
attemmpting to publish peoples' address
flooding newsgroups
and other such childishly moronic behaviour.
Too bad that in your world that is the norm not the exception..
Too bad also that you're dumb enough to consider that in any way acceptable.
Nuff said indeed..
..
Peter S. Saly
"Joskyn ®" <jos...@4q2.arsewipe> wrote in message
news:8pnguts4thseliomg...@4ax.com...
I passed by the kindergarden called alt.2600 for quite a long time, until
the inmates drew my attention by their stupid behavior.
> >I WANT TO Grow up !.
> >
> You said it geezer
>
Since YOU added the "I WANT TO" to my "Grow up !", it is clear that you are
confusing YOUR desires with your fantasies..
To be called a "geezer" by a adolescent idiot is a compliment..
Thank you.
Now go back to sucking your thumb, your blankie or whatever else you suck on
so regularly to impede neuron development.
Iceman
wrote:
Please recheck your anonymous post:
Peter S. Saly
"Iceman" <c0l...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:meahut4km0kondeqv...@4ax.com...
> > pornographic pictures
> > attemmpting to publish peoples' address
> > flooding newsgroups
> >and other such childishly moronic behaviour.
> >
> >Too bad that in your world that is the norm not the exception..
> >Too bad also that you're dumb enough to consider that in any way
acceptable.
> > Nuff said indeed..
> >..
> >
>
> Please recheck your anonymous post:
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22peter+s+saly%22&start=120&hl=en&rnum=12
5&selm=i8sd7.193482%24cc1.10293498%40nnrp3.clara.net
>
My....
But you really are a retard..
You can't look up anything on google without getting confused..
What on earth makes you think that I posted that ?
Oh I forget, you're part of the Jessness Jerks..
Sorry,
I keep assuming a certain level of intelligence that just isn't there..
Iceman
wrote:
Like Brad/Not Brad you are disclaiming the post?
Actually I could buy that thought, but someone somewhere did recognize
your alter ego long ago, yes, before us.
When I ran across that one I almost spit my coffee on the monitor.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Peter S. Saly
What is there to disclaim, stupid?
That I didn't post it.
That obvious to any half-brained moron who can read..
Too bad you can't read, you less-than a half-baked moron..
Some idiot, using a Belgian anonymiser, posted a whole series of those
posts to try to get me.
And you're a big enough dummy to assume it was from me..
No wonder you Jessness Jerks see him everywhere..
Oh well.
There's got to be a way to keep idiots like you occupied at harmless
things..
Joskyn ®
wrote:
>
>"Joskyn ®" <jos...@4q2.arsewipe> wrote in message
>news:8pnguts4thseliomg...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 14:21:11 -0600, "Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"ramalane" <rama...@cotse.com> wrote in message
>> >news:iVWF7.22004$jP3.6...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
>> >> http://www.goatsex.org/
>> >>
>> >> /ramalane
>> >> --
>> >> Alt.Hackers.Malicious Survival Guide
>> >> http://www.ramalane.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >By the style and subject of these posts, rama-lame is definitely an
>escapee
>> >from middle school.
>> >
>>
>> So what, are you jealous that you never passed kindergarten?
>>
>
>I passed by the kindergarden called alt.2600 for quite a long time, until
>the inmates drew my attention by their stupid behavior.
>
>
>
>> >I WANT TO Grow up !.
>> >
>> You said it geezer
>>
>
>Since YOU added the "I WANT TO" to my "Grow up !", it is clear that you are
>confusing YOUR desires with your fantasies..
>
Now why would I want to grow up? to become a biitter, ugly, lonely,
ego tripping, wannabe pretender like you?
Never made anything of yourself in real life, a total failure, so you
have to dress up in your uniform and go play mini god for 90 minutes.
You relish everytime you blow you little polished whistle. Well, it's
the only power that you will ever know and see. You get a boner
everytime you pull out a card, and if it's red, then it's "cream you
shorts time" for you.
Mummy's boy is a loser in life. Does she wash and iron her little
boy's uniform for him.....she must be so proud to have a failure for a
son.
>To be called a "geezer" by a adolescent idiot is a compliment..
> Thank you.
>Now go back to sucking your thumb, your blankie or whatever else you suck on
>so regularly to impede neuron development.
The neuron activity within my thumb far exceeds the neuron activity in
your cranium.
Now go crawl back into the abortion bucket you came out of, and get a
life loser boy.
Joskyn
>
>
Darren J. Young
> The kiddies are still into kindergarden level line-drawings..
> Oh well.
> They do have to keep themselves busy..
Oh, in case your handicap prevented you from seeing it, the goat had 5
legs. You must have been inbreeding with goats for some time for that to
happen Saly.
Peter S. Saly
"Joskyn ®" <jos...@4q2.arsewipe> wrote in message
For an idiot who has never met me..
You sure are fantasizing a great deal about me..
And I won't even touch your obvious ignorance about refereeing, wether it's
soccer or any other sport.
I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of the
game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
refereeing is.
2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport field.
And the reason for that is very simple
The players pay your refereeing fee.
If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
future.
But hey..
Any moron can blather nonsense, as you so aptly demonstrate..
> >To be called a "geezer" by a adolescent idiot is a compliment..
> > Thank you.
> >Now go back to sucking your thumb, your blankie or whatever else you suck
on
> >so regularly to impede neuron development.
>
> The neuron activity within my thumb far exceeds the neuron activity in
> your cranium.
>
> Now go crawl back into the abortion bucket you came out of, and get a
> life loser boy.
>
> Joskyn
>
Sure..
Whatever you say..
But there is a point you seem to miss
Unlike losers like you.
I do NOT spend my time INVENTING drivel about other people.
The fact that you confuse your drivel with reality, makes a clear definition
of who is the REAL loser..
Let's see if you're smart enough to figure it out..
(But here a clue for the idiot...
It's not me...)
Peter S. Saly
"Darren J. Young" <MnCAD...@Excite.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1653181a9...@news.cloudnet.com...
Didn't bother looking long and in detail at the drawing
Also, never bred a goat in my life..
But obviously, you're just another idiot who confuses his wet dreams
with reality..
0rion
news:tujs1le...@corp.supernews.com...
Who did you say doesn't invent drivel? I'll quote you inventing drivel in numerous
posts you've made on this newsgroup.
> "Don't tell me.. You're an English major at UCI.. Better for you to clean the
latrines."
Information and Computer Science major, possible double major with physics.
> "Who's surprised that you acces the kook archives.. You must feel right at home..."
> "Now it's a vocabulary flame.. You really are getting desperate"
> "There are still a few of your idiot buddies left.. I can torture them until they
scuttle away like little insects.."
> "But since I'm addressing you and your buds.. I'm not dealing with any real
intelligence.."
> "It's a waste of effort, to come "come across intelligently", when addressing
things as intelligent as stupid sponges.."
> "Which is why, unlike you, I am totally clueless about how one gets to smell bad by
"eating asses out at your 'job'"..."
> "Why don't you take your own proposal.. And go play under a bus.. You are small
enough to fit.."
> "For example your bad Hispanic accent "jooo" in no way implies that you have a
fixation for bad Hispanic accents."
Do all Hispanics have accents? Is "jooo" only the result of having a Hispanic accent?
Did you even aim this insult at the right person when you used it? No, No, and No.
> "So according to you "shrimps" is not a word.. Okey-dokey you donkey. Whatever you
bray.."
There they are, complete with horrible typos, racial statements, redundant and/or
stupid insults, and mal-formed grammar. I got rid of the annoying SalyTabs(R) too.
There's your proof by contradiction, Saly.
Peter S. Saly
Peter S. Saly
Too bad you haven't yet taken a course of logical thinking where you learned
something..
I'm sorry..
But I'm really not interested in deflating your stupid little balloons..
But if you think that you have achieved "proof by contradiction" anywhere in
the above...
You'd better study up on "proof by contradiction" and how it should be used
to be effective..
I would have failed you in my logical thinking class with such a
presentation..
But hey.
I'm really not up on the academic standards that are acceptable at UCI..
(But I'm not impressed...)
Rev Turd Fredericks
as hard to get into. There, you are now up on the academic standards at
UCI.
By the way, how many Nobel prize winners has UQAM produced? A quick
search of the Nobel website indicates NONE. The same search done for
UCI, indicates 2, one of which is in physics which it seems our friend
Orion is about to enroll in for his double major. Gee, I wonder whose
school might have higher academic standards? At least he'll get taught
by a Nobel prize winner, and not some wannabe loser at a second rate
school.
--
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.
-Bob Dylan
0rion
>
> "0rion" <rio...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9sd7ui$r0b$1...@news.service.uci.edu...
> > "Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com> wrote in message
> > news:tujs1le...@corp.supernews.com...
> >
Oh? And it's probably known as logical thinking in layman's terms. It's discrete math
where I come from.
> I'm sorry..
We know you are.
> But I'm really not interested in deflating your stupid little balloons..
That's probably good, since I don't have balloons.
> But if you think that you have achieved "proof by contradiction" anywhere in
> the above...
I do indeed.
You said that I'm an English major. I am not an English major. Contradicted.
You said I'm getting desperate. I am not. Contradicted.
If you REALLY want me to I'll dig out some old book of mine and tell you the
definition of 'Proof by contradiction but it usually consists of finding one instance
that proves a statement invalid. For instance
U = All people named Peter with the last name inital S
W(x) = X is a smelly wanker
For all 'P' in the universe of discourse 'U', W(P) is true.
// Universal Quantification
This is easily proven wrong by contradiction. Find a Peter S. who isn't a smelly
wanker. However,
There exists a 'P' in the universe of discourse 'U' such that W(X) is true.
// Existential Quantification
Obviously you fit the criteria perfectly, and this statement cannot be proved wrong
by any means.
> You'd better study up on "proof by contradiction" and how it should be used
> to be effective..
Been there.
> I would have failed you in my logical thinking class with such a
> presentation..
Judging from your posts I'd have bailed because of the appearance and demeanor of my
professor, and proceeded to add a class taught by someone more intelligent.
> But hey.
> I'm really not up on the academic standards that are acceptable at UCI..
Neither am I. Everyone said it would be SOOO hard....
> (But I'm not impressed...)
Who's point was it to impress you, and why would anyone ever bother trying to?
Peter S. Saly
"Rev Turd Fredericks" <turd...@catholic.org> wrote in message
news:PM0003923...@dhcppc1.home.com...
>
> Same academic standards at UCI as there are at Berkeley and it's almost
> as hard to get into. There, you are now up on the academic standards at
> UCI.
>
Why thank you..
That's nice of you..
> By the way, how many Nobel prize winners has UQAM produced? A quick
> search of the Nobel website indicates NONE. The same search done for
> UCI, indicates 2, one of which is in physics which it seems our friend
> Orion is about to enroll in for his double major. Gee, I wonder whose
> school might have higher academic standards? At least he'll get taught
> by a Nobel prize winner, and not some wannabe loser at a second rate
> school.
>
None that I know of
But it should also be noted that research is not the main mission of UQAM
It's primary purpose is EDUCATION.
Also UQAM has not been around as long as UC.
So what's the pertinence of your question ?
Does having Nobel prize winners automatically filter idiots from the student
body ?
Not the last time I checked..
By the way, I have met a lot of idiots with high GPAs, SATs and other test
scores, who have learned how to do well on tests, but couldn't otherwise
think their way out of a paper bag open at both ends.
As to Nobel prize winners teaching anything less than graduate students..
Don't make me laugh.
Your odds are better at winning a state lottery.
It should also be noted that Nobel prize level research is rarely of direct
benefit to undergrads and even most grad students..
As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket weaving..
Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
Peter S. Saly
Too bad the education available "where you come from" has major gaps in it..
Discrete math is only a mathematical subset (you've learned about Set Theory
I hope) of logical thinking.
Logical thinking appears in other areas, such as Philosophy
(And I hope you've also heard of Philosophy
But just to clue you in, look up what the Ph PhD stands for..
That particularly version of thinking has been around BEFORE
Discrete Math was defined)
> > I'm sorry..
>
> We know you are.
>
I was being polite.
But, if you wish to have it as a description of yourself.
I approve.
It is indeed a-propos
(That's French for appropriate)
> > But I'm really not interested in deflating your stupid little balloons..
>
> That's probably good, since I don't have balloons.
>
See above.
Your ignorant sortie about Discrete Math definitely qualiifies..
> > But if you think that you have achieved "proof by contradiction"
anywhere in
> > the above...
>
> I do indeed.
> You said that I'm an English major. I am not an English major.
Contradicted.
> You said I'm getting desperate. I am not. Contradicted.
>
No stupid.
I was being I R O N I C.
I was presenting a P O S I T..
I aslo did not "say it" as you claim.
I did not even "write it" as you imply
I posed it in a R H E T O R I C A L question
Feel free to look up the words in upper-case, and then have someone in
the English department explain them to you and their use in composition.
> If you REALLY want me to I'll dig out some old book of mine and tell you
the
> definition of 'Proof by contradiction but it usually consists of finding
one instance
> that proves a statement invalid. For instance
>
> U = All people named Peter with the last name inital S
> W(x) = X is a smelly wanker
>
> For all 'P' in the universe of discourse 'U', W(P) is true.
> // Universal Quantification
>
> This is easily proven wrong by contradiction. Find a Peter S. who isn't a
smelly
> wanker. However,
>
> There exists a 'P' in the universe of discourse 'U' such that W(X) is
true.
> // Existential Quantification
>
> Obviously you fit the criteria perfectly, and this statement cannot be
proved wrong
> by any means.
>
Too bad that the basic premise for the above was COMPLETELY WRONG.
Surely you know what happens when the basic premise in a logical argument is
wrong ?..
I'll let you look it up.
Oh by the way..
During arguments such as these, the literal application of mathematicl rules
of logic, without taking into consideration literary form, will induce you
in error nearly 99.99% of the time.
That's something you can pick up in a good course of semantic analysis.
I STRONGLY suggest you take such a course ASAP..
You are in dire need of it..
> > You'd better study up on "proof by contradiction" and how it should be
used
> > to be effective..
>
> Been there.
>
Not when your basic posit is wrong..
Then you've been NOWHERE.
> > I would have failed you in my logical thinking class with such a
> > presentation..
>
> Judging from your posts I'd have bailed because of the appearance and
demeanor of my
> professor, and proceeded to add a class taught by someone more
intelligent.
>
They didn't hire me for my demeanor..
They hired me to teach..
Ironically, the wusses who bailed went on to take easier subjects where they
could more easily get good grades that education-wise were meaningless.
My students, the ones who stayed, listened, worked and learned got my
respect
And even with my lousy demeanor:
I still managed to be rated in the top 5% of all the teaching body..
Many of my students most happily came back to my classes to help with
the following years' student projects..
> > But hey.
> > I'm really not up on the academic standards that are acceptable at UCI..
>
> Neither am I. Everyone said it would be SOOO hard....
>
> > (But I'm not impressed...)
>
> Who's point was it to impress you, and why would anyone ever bother trying
to?
>
I don't know "Who's"(sic) point it was to impress me..
But hey, you're the one that's trying to use flawed logic based on a lack of
semantic comprehension
I thought you were trying to show off how smart you were..
So I guess, you were trying to..
Peter S. Saly
<Yomamma bin Crawd...@allah.net> wrote in message
news:an5kut4n4iph9bne4...@4ax.com...
> I have to differ with your approach.
>
> You see......
> All you educated folks go to such extents to express yourselve's and
> that is a rather impressive formula I have to admit.
> However,
> Down here in the swamps we prefer to just call him an asshole
> and be done with it.
> Yeah,
> I know it is our version of short math but it achieves the same
> result.
>
>
> >> You'd better study up on "proof by contradiction" and how it should be
used
> >> to be effective..
> >
> >Been there.
> >
> >> I would have failed you in my logical thinking class with such a
> >> presentation..
> >
> >Judging from your posts I'd have bailed because of the appearance and
demeanor of my
> >professor, and proceeded to add a class taught by someone more
intelligent.
> >
> >> But hey.
> >> I'm really not up on the academic standards that are acceptable at
UCI..
> >
> >Neither am I. Everyone said it would be SOOO hard....
> >
> >> (But I'm not impressed...)
> >
> >Who's point was it to impress you, and why would anyone ever bother
trying to?
>
> (watch that line)
> Sally will use it in a few days.
> :-)
"Delusions of self-importance"
That's good..
Actually the more correct term would be "Delusions of Grandeur"
It was a term coined by some Frenchman, originally "Delusions de
Grandeur"..
But hey...
Whatever malaprops that describes you works for me..
Peter S. Saly
>
> You left out he is kicking everybody's ass too.
> LTHTFD
> (Laughing Too Hard To Fall Down)
> :-)
Hard to fall down when you're already crawling under the surface..
:-))
Joskyn ®
wrote:
>
>For an idiot who has never met me..
> You sure are fantasizing a great deal about me..
>And I won't even touch your obvious ignorance about refereeing, wether it's
>soccer or any other sport.
>I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
>1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of the
>game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
>refereeing is.
>2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport field.
> And the reason for that is very simple
> The players pay your refereeing fee.
> If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
>future.
>
>But hey..
> Any moron can blather nonsense, as you so aptly demonstrate..
>
Woooo Hooooo, touched a sensitive spot there did I Herr Peter "SS"
Saly.
You do it for the love of watching fit men running up and down
sweating, and then launching an ego trip by projecting your inadequate
personality on them.
>
>> >To be called a "geezer" by a adolescent idiot is a compliment..
>> > Thank you.
>> >Now go back to sucking your thumb, your blankie or whatever else you suck
>on
>> >so regularly to impede neuron development.
>>
>> The neuron activity within my thumb far exceeds the neuron activity in
>> your cranium.
>>
>> Now go crawl back into the abortion bucket you came out of, and get a
>> life loser boy.
>>
>> Joskyn
>>
>
>Sure..
> Whatever you say..
> But there is a point you seem to miss
>Unlike losers like you.
> I do NOT spend my time INVENTING drivel about other people.
>The fact that you confuse your drivel with reality, makes a clear definition
>of who is the REAL loser..
> Let's see if you're smart enough to figure it out..
> (But here a clue for the idiot...
> It's not me...)
>
>
Since when has anything you said meant anything, to anyone?, well
apart from "Mommie, let me take you up the poop chute again"
Go play Adolf's elsewhere, stick your Jack Boots on and go post to a
NG where ppl who give a fuck about wannabe's like you.
As for being a loser, myself and several others who dislike you in
here, earn more from our trades in month, than you do in an entire
year. LOSER BOY
BAWHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
Peter "SS" Saly, Loser in Life, Work, Play and Usenet...way to go
LOSER BOY
Joskyn
Peter S. Saly
"Joskyn ®" <jos...@4q2.arsewipe> wrote in message
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2001 20:37:31 -0600, "Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >For an idiot who has never met me..
> > You sure are fantasizing a great deal about me..
> >And I won't even touch your obvious ignorance about refereeing, wether
it's
> >soccer or any other sport.
> >I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
> >1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of
the
> >game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
> >refereeing is.
> >2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport
field.
> > And the reason for that is very simple
> > The players pay your refereeing fee.
> > If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
> >future.
> >
> >But hey..
> > Any moron can blather nonsense, as you so aptly demonstrate..
> >
> Woooo Hooooo, touched a sensitive spot there did I Herr Peter "SS"
> Saly.
>
Actually the only sensitive spot I may have is an aversion to blatant
stupidity and ignorance..
And you seem to have both in spades.
> You do it for the love of watching fit men running up and down
> sweating, and then launching an ego trip by projecting your inadequate
> personality on them.
>
Once again you are confused by your ignorant assumptions..
And obviously you are unable to read more that 3 words in a row without
getting lost and confused..
Your premise that referees are out for
"an ego trip to project their inadequate personality on them (the
players)."
is so far out in left field, that you are actually out-of-bounds (to use a
metaphor)..
In any sanctionned soccer game there are actually 3 teams on the field.
The 2 teams playing, and the officials team..
Notice that I say officials in the plural. Since there are usually 3
officials in a FIFA/USSF-sanctionned soccer game.
Multiple officials is also true for most other sports these days..
I'll also repeat the point I made earlier that you obviously did not read..
I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of the
game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
refereeing is.
2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport field.
And the reason for that is very simple
The players pay your refereeing fee.
If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
future.
You really should demosntrate that you are more than just a stupid little
troll..
But I am more thatn happy to helpo you prove that your are nothing but a
dumb troll if that is what you wish..
>
>
> >
> >> >To be called a "geezer" by a adolescent idiot is a compliment..
> >> > Thank you.
> >> >Now go back to sucking your thumb, your blankie or whatever
> >> > else you suckon so regularly to impede neuron development.
And this from an idiot who can't read a complex text without getting lost
and repeating his ignorant rant..
So you are indeed an ignorant little troll, malicious hacker wannabe..
Hey..
That's your fantasy life..
But just remember it is ONLY a fantasy...
Joskyn ®
wrote:
And your ignorance is only exceeded by your arrogance...If your
adversion to such things is so pasionate, then why have you not killed
yourself yet. I am sure we can all find you at least 1 URL each to
help you on your way, having said that, you have no life at the
moment, so nothing will really change for you.
>
>> You do it for the love of watching fit men running up and down
>> sweating, and then launching an ego trip by projecting your inadequate
>> personality on them.
>>
>
>Once again you are confused by your ignorant assumptions..
> And obviously you are unable to read more that 3 words in a row without
>getting lost and confused..
>
Sorry, thats about 20-30 words too many for me, can you repeat the
question in three words blocks please?
>Your premise that referees are out for
> "an ego trip to project their inadequate personality on them (the
>players)."
>is so far out in left field, that you are actually out-of-bounds (to use a
>metaphor)..
oooooooo, sensitive point again.
Try reading some research into why people with personanlities like
yours become a ref, or a traffic warden, or a car park
attendent...Makes interesting reading.
>In any sanctionned soccer game there are actually 3 teams on the field.
> The 2 teams playing, and the officials team..
>Notice that I say officials in the plural. Since there are usually 3
>officials in a FIFA/USSF-sanctionned soccer game.
Eh, try and know your subject please, in ALL FIFA sanctioned games,
there are 4 (FOUR) Officials.
> Multiple officials is also true for most other sports these days..
>I'll also repeat the point I made earlier that you obviously did not read..
>I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
>1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of the
>game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
>refereeing is.
I read what you said, and prehaps you ought to understand your own,
and their, personalities a little better.
>2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport field.
> And the reason for that is very simple
> The players pay your refereeing fee.
> If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
>future.
bawhahahahahahaha, if that was the case then there would be no refs
and no soccer....
>
>You really should demosntrate that you are more than just a stupid little
>troll..
Why, I like what I do, quite relaxing watching little Adolf's like you
squirm and spit out shit. After a hard days work earning more money in
a day, than you do in month, trolling clieless fuckwits like you is
fun.
>But I am more thatn happy to helpo you prove that your are nothing but a
>dumb troll if that is what you wish..
Dumb, nah, troll, YEP, thats me Mr. Peter "SS" Saly.
damn, more than three words in a row, please repeat in blocks of three
please...all this sheep shagging has fucked my head in.
>
>So you are indeed an ignorant little troll, malicious hacker wannabe..
>Hey..
> That's your fantasy life..
>But just remember it is ONLY a fantasy...
You believe that if you want...I am NOT saying a single word on the
matter, no sir, not a SINGLE word.
TTFN LOSER BOY, hope you like mommies shit lubricated anal cavity, I
am sure the felching side is the bit you like best...
Joskyn
>
>
Rev Turd Fredericks
We're talking about University of California at Irvine, not UC in
general. UCI was established in 1965, so it has been around only 4 years
longer than UQAM.
An excerpt from the UCI Chancellor's web page:
"Since 1965, the University of California, Irvine has been distinguished
by a spirit of innovation, with strengths in research, teaching and
public service that match regional, national and international
priorities. Today, with about 1,150 faculty and nearly 22,000 students,
UCI is Orange County's third-largest employer with an annual economic
impact that exceeds $2.35 billion.
US News & World Report ranks UCI among the nation's 10 best public
universities. Achievements in research, humanities, arts, management and
social sciences have also garnered numerous high national rankings for
UCI's schools. UCI is the first public university with faculty receiving
Nobel Prizes in two different fields - chemistry and physics - in the
same year."
How's that for academic standards? Among the 10 best schools in a field
of thousands.
>
> So what's the pertinence of your question ?
> Does having Nobel prize winners automatically filter idiots from the
> student
> body ?
No, but it helps to reform them, by effectively telling them to either
get with the program or lose out on the opportunity for a 1st rate
education by a University with the capacity to produce Nobel Prize
winners.
> Not the last time I checked..
> By the way, I have met a lot of idiots with high GPAs, SATs and other
> test
> scores, who have learned how to do well on tests, but couldn't
> otherwise
> think their way out of a paper bag open at both ends.
You are digressing into flaws that have existed in worldwide educational
systems as far back as anyone can remember. Really not relevant to the
discussion because we are talking about standards, not students. You are
trying to divert attention away from the fact that what you implied
about UCI and academic standards is false. Further, that in comparison
to UCI, UQAM is definately second if not 3rd rate.
>
> As to Nobel prize winners teaching anything less than graduate
> students..
> Don't make me laugh.
> Your odds are better at winning a state lottery.
Not true at all. Although it appears the distinguished Dr. Reines,
winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1995, has become a Professor
Emeritus and no longer actively participates in teaching, he last taught
an undergraduate class in Spring 1999
(http://www.reg.uci.edu/registrar/online_soc.html) as he did for at
least one term per year since his appearance at UCI in 1966. However, he
is still present on campus and probably delivers the occasional guest
lecture (as Emerites often do) which all undergrads are welcome to
attend.
>
> It should also be noted that Nobel prize level research is rarely of
> direct
> benefit to undergrads and even most grad students..
As proven above, Nobel Prize level research is of direct benefit to
undergraduate students as Dr. Reines's close collegues still teach
undergraduate and graduate classes, as is required of all active UCI
professors. We are talking about a learning environment enriched with
the legacy and presence of Nobel Prize winners.
>
> As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
> For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket weaving..
>
> Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
>
What balloons have you burst? Seems more like you are digging yourself a
deeper hole with your lack of worldly knowledge.
0rion
Wow Rev, I'm impressed. I didn't personally take the time to defend my school against
the moronic statements Saly made, as I considered it rather stupid of him to say
things without even checking rankings or University history. I don't feel comfortable
preaching for or promoting my campus out of modesty... but you did so very
gracefully. Good job. :) Oh well. Once again, one of us totally humiliated Saly.
Iceman
wrote:
>
Crawdads always crawl under the surface you moron!
One reason they can so successfully root out denizens like you!
Oh....I forgot, in your case cause shit floats to the top. And he
doesn't habitat cesspools.
Iceman
wrote:
>
Please! Show some respect here, it is REV. Turd, you fukker!
Rev Turd Fredericks
Thanks. He really should learn what he is talking about before he tries
to type it out. You should be proud to be at UCI. Now if they could just
do something about the parking and administration, it would be an even
better school.
If you have time one day, you should check out some of the stuff in the
main library, they have (or maybe had), a nice UCI history display. It's
really interesting to see the rapid development of the now sprawling
campus. When it originally opened it looked like a dirt farm, with
students tromping off to classes along dirt paths in what really
amounted to a desert.
Peter S. Saly
Peter S. Saly
You may revere him as much as you want..
But I don't..
Peter S. Saly
I also read an interesting critique of the way that US News and World
Reports comes to it's ranking..
It raised some issues as to the real validity of those numbers..
> >
> > So what's the pertinence of your question ?
> > Does having Nobel prize winners automatically filter idiots from the
> > student body ?
>
> No, but it helps to reform them, by effectively telling them to either
> get with the program or lose out on the opportunity for a 1st rate
> education by a University with the capacity to produce Nobel Prize
> winners.
>
You seem confused with the process of an undergrad education and the process
of getting to a Nobel Prize..
They are two separate paths that are totally unrelated..
It's like trying to relate a NASCAR champion having an effect on the quality
of Driver's Ed in a High School..
> > Not the last time I checked..
> > By the way, I have met a lot of idiots with high GPAs, SATs and other
> > test
> > scores, who have learned how to do well on tests, but couldn't
> > otherwise
> > think their way out of a paper bag open at both ends.
>
> You are digressing into flaws that have existed in worldwide educational
> systems as far back as anyone can remember. Really not relevant to the
> discussion because we are talking about standards, not students. You are
> trying to divert attention away from the fact that what you implied
> about UCI and academic standards is false. Further, that in comparison
> to UCI, UQAM is definately second if not 3rd rate.
>
If you say so...
Except for a little detail..
Standards unfortunately are closely related to many things, including
student quality
Schools such as UCI, are in actual fact undergrad mils, to (much too often)
subsidize other programs.
In actual fact, the quality of a university education depends far more on
the student than the school..
The schools purpose is to aid in the process.
Sadly there is another factor that comes into play, particularly in the US,
which is that too many schools cultivate an image to appeal to the public
and the media.
In many cases, the image is often quite separate from reality.
> >
> > As to Nobel prize winners teaching anything less than graduate
> > students..
> > Don't make me laugh.
> > Your odds are better at winning a state lottery.
>
> Not true at all. Although it appears the distinguished Dr. Reines,
> winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1995, has become a Professor
> Emeritus and no longer actively participates in teaching, he last taught
> an undergraduate class in Spring 1999
> (http://www.reg.uci.edu/registrar/online_soc.html) as he did for at
> least one term per year since his appearance at UCI in 1966. However, he
> is still present on campus and probably delivers the occasional guest
> lecture (as Emerites often do) which all undergrads are welcome to
> attend.
>
Well that's nice..
And exactly how many undegrad students got Dr Reines from the whole
undergrad student body ?
Also there is another issue..
Being smart enough to get a Nobel Prize is no garantee of being in any
way competent in front of a classroom...
Trust me, I've had the experience many times..
> >
> > It should also be noted that Nobel prize level research is rarely of
> > direct
> > benefit to undergrads and even most grad students..
>
> As proven above, Nobel Prize level research is of direct benefit to
> undergraduate students as Dr. Reines's close collegues still teach
> undergraduate and graduate classes, as is required of all active UCI
> professors. We are talking about a learning environment enriched with
> the legacy and presence of Nobel Prize winners.
>
Once again, you are confused...
Nobel Prize winners and their immediate circle of colleagues are sadly not
usually competent to teach undergrads.
It takes a major mental shift that most of them are just not flexible enough
or willing to make on a regular basis.
That's the equivalent of asking a World Cup level referee, to take time out
to teach a intro class in the Laws of the Game.
It's not a question of their not knowing said laws
It's a question of them using said laws in a totally different ways than
some new referee needs to learn
I've had the experience of sitting in classes taught by Noble Prize
candidate and winners
I've also had the same experience with International level Soccer referees.
The problem is the same.
The great majority of them are not functionning at the same level as some
individual just learning the basics..
Ironically in soccer, when you give up doing the levels that you cannot do
any more, you can retain your badge as an Emeritus referee..
But once they are Emeritus, they are not as involved in the purer form of
their art/science, and they effectively can back off working at the heady
level where they erarned their recognition
And then they can effectively, start relating their experience to those
coming up in the field.
But by that time, they are not necessarily up to speed of what is happening
at the edge of the enveloppe of their field.
> >
> > As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
> > For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket weaving..
> >
> > Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
> >
> What balloons have you burst? Seems more like you are digging yourself a
> deeper hole with your lack of worldly knowledge.
>
I didn't realize that "worldy knowledge" required my knowing about a Nobel
Prize winner doing 1 undegrad course per year at UCI.
Must be a definition local to alt.2600..
Rev Turd Fredericks
That's nice, how did UQAM rate in that poll? If we take the numbers and
correct them for French Universities, does UQAM gain any ground? I
didn't think so. How about if we just put the two into a field of two?
Somehow, I just don't think UQAM will come out on top. But I know you
know that too, which is why your bragging about teaching at UQAM is so
funny; there is just nothing to brag about.
>> >
>> > So what's the pertinence of your question ?
>> > Does having Nobel prize winners automatically filter idiots from
> the
>> > student body ?
>>
>> No, but it helps to reform them, by effectively telling them to
> either
>> get with the program or lose out on the opportunity for a 1st rate
>> education by a University with the capacity to produce Nobel Prize
>> winners.
>>
>
> You seem confused with the process of an undergrad education and the
> process
> of getting to a Nobel Prize..
> They are two separate paths that are totally unrelated..
> It's like trying to relate a NASCAR champion having an effect on the
> quality
> of Driver's Ed in a High School..
Where did that come from dumbass? I would say that the possibility that
an undergrad can be taught by a nobel prize winner would far outweigh
that of the possibility that they may be taught by a loser at UQAM. But
gee, that's only my opinion, it could be wrong, but I don't think so.
Enhhhh. Wrong again asshole. UCI has millions of dollars to put into
undergrad education including, but not limited to the latest equipment,
the best teachers, and access to resources which undergrads in lesser
schools like yours could only dream of. UCI has a proven record of
results when it comes to education, specifically in the area of
engineering and medical sciences. Their budget for administrating all
the money they get is probably more than the total budget of UQAM for
all programs. ie. they spend more on figuring out how to spend all their
money than UQAM has in total. This translates to fantastic opportunities
for undergrads to work with equipment on a routine basis that undergrads
at UQAM only get to read about in books. Sorry, but UCI wasn't rated in
the top ten for nothing, regardless of how mere academics like yourself
like to denegrate the rankings.
So you figure you are better than Dr. Reines? Where is your Nobel Prize?
I looked, but I didn't find one with your name on it. But lets forget
about Dr. Reines's Nobel prize (and your lack of one) for a minute and
get back to the issue at hand. You were implying that UCI had
questionable academic satndards, and I have proven, without a doubt that
UCI has far better academic standards than UQAM. So regardless of your
questions, we can see that Orion is getting a far better education and
has better opportunities than anybody at UQAM. Case closed. You are a
pompous asshole, and Orion is getting a great education which I hope he
takes full advantage of.
By the way here are Rest of the Physics Dep faculty. at UCI's awards,
(people who Orion will be taught by):
U.C. Irvine
Physics and Astronomy Faculty
Honors and Awards
The Nobel Prize in Physics, 1995, to Frederick Reines
The UCI Medal - the highest honor given by UCI
Frederick Reines, 1987
Lauds and Laurels Awards of the UCI Alumni Association
Distinguished Research
Alexei Maradudin, 1973
Douglas L. Mills, 1984
Extraordinarius
Alexei Maradudin, 1976
Distinguished Teaching
William Heidbrink, 1995
University Service
William Parker, 1980
Awards of the Academic Senate
Distinguished Faculty Lectureship Award for Research
Frederick Reines, 1979
Norman Rostoker, 1989
Awards of the Office of the President
Presidential Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Research
Roger McWilliams, Inaugural Winner, 1994
Fellows of the American Physical Society
Myron Bander, 1980
Walter Bron, 1969
Liu Chen, 1980
William Heidbrink, 1996
Alexei Maradudin, 1962
Hardy Mayer, 1966
Doug Mills, 1977
William Molzon, 1995
Frederick Reines, 1957
Norman Rostoker, 1960
Nat Rynn, 1988
Jonas Schultz, 1991
Hank Sobel, 1998
Virginia Trimble, 1988
Gerard VanHoven, 1988
Richard Wallis, 1962
Steve White, 1998
Gaurang Yodh, 1968
Faculty Awards List
Myron Bander
American Physical Society, Fellow 1980
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1962-69
Steven Barwick
NSF Young Investigator Award 1992-97
Irvine Faculty Fellowship Award for Research 1991
Gregory Benford
Cambridge University, Fellow 1976
Woodrow Wilson Fellowship 1963
Australian Ditmar Award 1980
International Campbell Award 1980
Nebula Award (Science Fiction) 1975
Nebula Award (Science Fiction) 1980
United Nations Medal in Literature 1989
Lord Foundation Award in Science 1995
Walter Bron
American Physical Society, Fellow 1969
Guggenheim Fellow 1966
Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Fellowship 1973
Gary Chanan
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1988
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1982-86
Liu Chen
American Physical Society, Fellow 1980
Japan Society for Promotion of Sciences Fellowship 1980
Michael Dennin
Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education 1998
Igor Dzyaloshinskii
Lomonosov Prize 1972
Order of Honor 1975
Order of Red Banner of Labour 1981
State Prize of USSR 1984
L. D. Landau Prize 1989
USSR Academy of Sciences, Member 1974
American Academy of Arts & Sciences, Member 1991
Herbert Hamber
Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education 1996
Fulbright Fellow, 1977-1982
Cern Fellow, 1994
William Heidbrink
Fellow of the American Physical Society, 1996
Campus Distinguished Teaching Award 1995
Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education 1991
Andrew Lankford
Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education 1997
Jon Lawrence
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1986
Alexei Maradudin
American Physical Society, Fellow 1962
Alexander von Humboldt Foundation: Senior Scientist Award 1980
Honorary Doctorate: Universite Pierre and Marie Curie-Paris VI 1986
Meinhard Mayer
American Physical Society, Fellow 1966
Int'l. Assoc. for Mathematical Physics, Founding Member 1970
College de France Medal 1985
Roger McWilliams
Faculty Honors Convocation Speaker, 1997
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1994
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1984
D. L. Mills
American Physical Society, Fellow 1977
Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Sr. Fellowship 1990
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1985
Yamada Foundation, Fellow 1983
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1968-70
William Molzon
Fellow of the American Physical Society, 1995
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1985
Outstanding Jr. Investigator, Dept. of Energy 1985
Riley Newman
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1987
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1970
Lewis Nosanow
Guggenheim Fellow 1966
William Parker
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1983
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1979
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1968-70
John Price Wetherill Medal, The Franklin Institute 1975
Steve Ruden
Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education 1993
Frederick Reines
Sigma Xi, 1944
Tau Beta Pi
Centennial Lecturer, University of Maryland, 1956
Fellow of the American Physical Society, 1957
Guggenheim Fellow, 1958-1959
Alfred P. Sloan Fellow, 1959-1963
Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1966
Honorary Doctor of Science Degree, University of Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg, South Africa, 1966
Phi Beta Kappa, 1969
Stevens Honor Award, 1971
Distinguished Faculty Lecturer, University of California, Irvine, 1979
Fellow, American Association Advancement of Science, 1979
National Academy of Sciences, 1980
J. Robert Oppenheimer Memorial Prize, 1981
National Medal of Science, awarded by the President of the United
States, Ronald Reagan
Honorary Doctor of Engineering, Stevens Institute of Technology, 1984
Medal for Outstanding Research, University of California, Irvine, 1985
National Medal of Science, 1985
L.I. Schiff Memorial Lecturer, Stanford, 1988
Albert Einstein Memorial Lecturer, Israel Academy of the Sciences and
Humanities, Jerusalem, 1988
Bruno Rossi Prize, American Astronomical Society, 1989, along with
Members of the IMB Collaboration, Wojciech Gajewski, William R. Kropp,
LeRoy Price, Jonas Schultz, Henry W. Sobel and Craig R. Wuest
Michelson-Morley Award, 1990
Goudschmidt Memorial Lecturer, 1990
New York University Plaque, 1990
Distinguished Alumnus Award, New York University, Faculty of Arts and
Sciences, 1990
W.K.H. Panofsky Prize, 1992
The Franklin Medal, awarded by Benjamin Franklin Institute Committee on
Science and the Arts, 1992
Foreign Member Russian Academy of Sciences, 1994
NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS, 1995
Citations of Awards for Frederick Reines
Norman Rostoker
American Physical Society, Chairman-Plasma Physics Division 1972
American Physical Society, Fellow 1960
James Clark Maxwell Prize in Plasma Physics, Amer. Phys. Soc. 1988
Distinguished Research Lecturer, UCI 1988
Steven Ruden
NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award 1991-96
Nathan Rynn
American Association for the Advancement of Science 1992
American Physical Society, Fellow 1988
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Life Fellow
Fulbright Fellowship 1978
Professeur Invite, Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne, Switzerland
Professeur Invite, Ecole Polytechnique de Palaiseau, France
James Rutledge
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1984
Jonas Schultz
American Astronomical Society, Bruno Rossi Prize 1989
American Physical Society, Fellow 1991
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fellow 1994
Outstanding Contribution to Undergraduate Education 1980
Tammy Smecker-Hane
AAS/AAUW Annie Jump Cannon Special Commendation of Honor 1995
Henry Sobel
American Physical Society, Fellow 1998
American Astronomical Society, Bruno Rossi Prize 1989
Virginia Trimble
American Physical Society, Fellow 1988
American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, Fellow 1982
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1972-74
J. Murray Luck Prize for Excellence in Scientific Reviewing, National
Academy of Sciences 1986
Outstanding Young Scientist, Maryland Academy of Sciences 1976
Ralph M. Johnson Distinguished Lecturer, Utah State University 1987
Gerard VanHoven
American Physical Society, Fellow 1988
Danforth Foundation Associate 1975
NAS-NRC Senior Research Associate 1968
Richard Wallis
American Physical Society, Fellow 1962
Distinguished Alumni Achievement Award-The George Washington University
1991
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fellow 1994
Steve White
American Physical Society, Fellow 1998
American Physical Society, Division Councillor for Computational
Physics, 1999
Gaurang Yodh
Fellow of the American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, 1995
American Physical Society, Fellow 1968
American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, Member
Chancellor's Distinguished Scholar Award, Univ. of Maryland 1981
Distinguished Physicist Award, Indian Physics Association 1990
Gold Medal, University of Bombay 1948
Clare Yu
Sloan Foundation Fellowship 1991-93
When we talk of academic standards, we are not talking about basics.
UQAM barely has the resources to teach what happened 5 years ago, let
alone bring students into the 21st century! Get a grip. Tell me that an
undergraduate psysics student that has an opportunity to work on a
particle accelerator doesn't have a better opportunity than one that
just gets to read about one in books (See this URL for details
http://www.ps.uci.edu/physics/reuprojects.html), and then fuck off
because I won't believe you.
>
> Ironically in soccer, when you give up doing the levels that you
> cannot do
> any more, you can retain your badge as an Emeritus referee..
> But once they are Emeritus, they are not as involved in the purer form
> of
> their art/science, and they effectively can back off working at the
> heady
> level where they erarned their recognition
> And then they can effectively, start relating their experience to
> those
> coming up in the field.
> But by that time, they are not necessarily up to speed of what is
> happening
> at the edge of the enveloppe of their field.
A career in Physics is a little beyond that of a soccer referee. But, in
case you fail in physics at UCI you can probably go for a career in
soccer refereeing as they have a pretty comprehensive athletics program.
>
>
>> >
>> > As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
>> > For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket
> weaving..
>> >
>> > Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
>> >
>> What balloons have you burst? Seems more like you are digging
> yourself a
>> deeper hole with your lack of worldly knowledge.
>>
>
>
> I didn't realize that "worldy knowledge" required my knowing about a
> Nobel
> Prize winner doing 1 undegrad course per year at UCI.
> Must be a definition local to alt.2600..
The point being that if you can't do a reasonable amount of research so
you know what you are talking about, you should shut your stupid
arrogant trap.
I spank you yet again. This is getting tedious and too easy.
0rion
> Peter S. Saly wrote:
<snip huge amount of verbal ass-kicking by Rev.>
>
> I spank you yet again. This is getting tedious and too easy.
>
> --
> For you don't count the dead
> When God's on your side.
> -Bob Dylan
One word...
FFFFFF A CCCCC EEEEEE
F A A C C E
F A A C E
FFFF AAAAAAA C EEEE
F A A C E
F A A C C E
F A A CCCCC EEEEEE
Peter S. Saly
"Joskyn ®" <jos...@4q2.arsewipe> wrote in message
Maybe it's because, there is far more evidence to suggest that I am not the
one suffering for either ignorance or arrogance.
(More on that later)
Maybe you should take your own advice and practice what you preach..
Possibly your parent's might miss you.
But maybe not.
> >
> >> You do it for the love of watching fit men running up and down
> >> sweating, and then launching an ego trip by projecting your inadequate
> >> personality on them.
> >>
> >
> >Once again you are confused by your ignorant assumptions..
> > And obviously you are unable to read more that 3 words in a row
without
> >getting lost and confused..
> >
> Sorry, thats about 20-30 words too many for me, can you repeat the
> question in three words blocks please?
>
This just qualifies as proof of ignorance.
Nothing arrogant about it.
But it makes the rest of the world remember the addage
"There but for the grace of God go I.."
>
> >Your premise that referees are out for
> > "an ego trip to project their inadequate personality on them (the
> >players)."
> >is so far out in left field, that you are actually out-of-bounds (to use
a
> >metaphor)..
> oooooooo, sensitive point again.
>
> Try reading some research into why people with personanlities like
> yours become a ref, or a traffic warden, or a car park
> attendent...Makes interesting reading.
>
And oubvioulsy you've done all three to have first-hand knowledge whereof
you speak...
But it's an interesting mix..
A car park attendant is no different from a cashier..
As a matter of fact, so is a traffic warden..
But there is a great difference between a referee and the others.
And thank you for your FIRST display of arrogant ignorance...
> >In any sanctionned soccer game there are actually 3 teams on the field.
> > The 2 teams playing, and the officials team..
> >Notice that I say officials in the plural. Since there are usually 3
> >officials in a FIFA/USSF-sanctionned soccer game.
>
> Eh, try and know your subject please, in ALL FIFA sanctioned games,
> there are 4 (FOUR) Officials.
>
Bzzzzt
Wrong answer..
There is your SECOND display of arrogant ignorance
I was talking about FIFA/USSF games which is a FAR BROADER category than
just plain FIFA International games.
But while were at it, I have been to a couple of youth tournaments that
qualified as FIFA sanctionned, where most of the games where refereed with
only 3 officials..
Also, the 4th Official at games is an OPTION not a requirement
And the 4th official has rather limited duties..
Feel free to download the laws of the game at:
http://www.fifa2.com/scripts/runisa.dll?S7:gp::67173+refs/laws
And just do a search on the word "fourth", to see how limited they are
Which is why the referee and the assistant referees each have one law
describing what they do, and the 4th official is only mentionned in the laws
and as an addendum
> > Multiple officials is also true for most other sports these days..
> >I'll also repeat the point I made earlier that you obviously did not
read..
> >I'll just mention 2 points about refereeing
> >1) Just about ALL the referees, I've ever met, do it for the love of
the
> >game and for the totally different aspect to refereeing the game that
> >refereeing is.
>
> I read what you said, and prehaps you ought to understand your own,
> and their, personalities a little better.
>
Thank you for your THIRD display of arrogant ignorance
So how many referees do you know personally..
I now quite a few, both soccer and hockey.
And I can tell you that you have NO CLUE as to the personalities of
referees. Sometimes reading second-hand reports are not the best way to
get informed..
Except naturally when you are looking to justify your prejudices..
> >2) "Tin-pot napoleon" wannabees do not survive long on any sport
field.
> > And the reason for that is very simple
> > The players pay your refereeing fee.
> > If you piss them off too much, you don't get assignements in the
> >future.
> bawhahahahahahaha, if that was the case then there would be no refs
> and no soccer....
This is your FOURTH demonstration of arrogant ignorance.
Maybe you should read up on the history of soccer refereeing.
And go to your library and read up on a couple of books about it as well
"Fair or Foul" is one title that comes to mind
> >
> >You really should demosntrate that you are more than just a stupid little
> >troll..
>
> Why, I like what I do, quite relaxing watching little Adolf's like you
> squirm and spit out shit. After a hard days work earning more money in
> a day, than you do in month, trolling clieless fuckwits like you is
> fun.
>
This is your FIFTH demonstration of arrogant ignorance..
Since you have NO CLUE as to what I make in a day..
There is NO WAY, that you have a clue wether you make more or less
than me..
On the other hand, reading your ignorant trolls..
I doubt if you make more than an incompetant parking attendant or
traffic warden..
YOu sure as hell aren't intelligent enough to last more than a season as a
referee.
How much money do you earn a day ?
ANd how many asses do you have to kiss and possibly lick to make it ?
> >But I am more thatn happy to help you prove that your are nothing but a
> >dumb troll if that is what you wish..
>
> Dumb, nah, troll, YEP, thats me Mr. Peter "SS" Saly.
>
Actually in your case, dumb and troll, go hand-in-hand..
By the way, Someone just pointed out to me that according to something
called Godwin you have defacto lost any argument on the simple premisethat
you made a reference to Nazis..
Personally, I find that to be a weak position to take..
I know that your position is weak, otherwise why come up with such silly
insults..
Which, by the way, brings us to your SIXTH demonstration of arrogant
ignorance..
Impossible..
You're head has nowhere to go..
It has imploded a long time ago for lack an any solid content...
> >
> >So you are indeed an ignorant little troll, malicious hacker wannabe..
> >Hey..
> > That's your fantasy life..
> >But just remember it is ONLY a fantasy...
>
> You believe that if you want...I am NOT saying a single word on the
> matter, no sir, not a SINGLE word.
>
> TTFN LOSER BOY, hope you like mommies shit lubricated anal cavity, I
> am sure the felching side is the bit you like best...
>
And naturally the favorite closer..
Projecting on me the unusual relation you had with your mother..
Please understand that your experence is not the norm..
But I will leave you to your ONLY expertise...
Peter S. Saly
I was bragging ?
Only in your stupid little mind..
But then I have always considered that Americans attitude to teaching and
teachers to be very backwards and short-sighted
Without teachers, this society will collapse
Notice that I did not write would.
And to presume so ignorantly that a teacher at UQAM may have less value that
a teacher a CUI, because of location, is also presumptuous.
I was living in Montreal at the time, so I taught in Montreal
And since teaching, was to me something I did on the side because the
University invited me to become an instructor, i see no reason to be
embarassed by it.
How many people do you know who get approached by and invited to teach at a
University ?
> >> >
> >> > So what's the pertinence of your question ?
> >> > Does having Nobel prize winners automatically filter idiots from
> > the
> >> > student body ?
> >>
> >> No, but it helps to reform them, by effectively telling them to
> > either
> >> get with the program or lose out on the opportunity for a 1st rate
> >> education by a University with the capacity to produce Nobel Prize
> >> winners.
> >>
> >
> > You seem confused with the process of an undergrad education and the
> > process
> > of getting to a Nobel Prize..
> > They are two separate paths that are totally unrelated..
> > It's like trying to relate a NASCAR champion having an effect on the
> > quality
> > of Driver's Ed in a High School..
>
> Where did that come from dumbass? I would say that the possibility that
> an undergrad can be taught by a nobel prize winner would far outweigh
> that of the possibility that they may be taught by a loser at UQAM. But
> gee, that's only my opinion, it could be wrong, but I don't think so.
>
Tssss...
It is really hard to explain anything to a linear-minded idiot..
Think about it..
You may not realize this, but teaching is NOT something any idiot can do off
the street..
You just have to think about the difference between the good and bad
teachers you've had in your life.
Also some teachers can be trained to be effective and successful as teachers
Others could be trained every day of their lives and still be less
competent that a parrot..
Then take into consideration that the qualities needed to get a Nobel Prize
are not exactly the same that can make you a good teacher..
Just think in terms of a Micheal Jordan, Wayne Gretsky, Tiger Woods..
They might not have either the interest or the talent to pass on what made
them successful as players..
Just think in terms of the successful coaches in sport.
How many were successful players ?
Very few.
Ad the reason is simple..
Coaching is a totally different mind and skill set from playing.
The fact that there had been a Nobel Prize teaching undergrads at UCI, is a
unique thing.
But it's NOT something that you can use after the fact to claim today...
Ah..
The old idiot argument that size is best..
Such a flawed argument...
Size CAN BE an advantage.
But it's no garantee of success.
That fallacious tenet is a cause of a great deal of mistakes by the US and
Americans in general ALL OVER THE WORLD..
I wil give you three examples of this..
The war in Vietnam
The war on Drugs
Prohibition
In all 3 cases, tons of money and ressources were thrown at the problem
And yet the situations in all 3 cases deteriorated to such a point, that
in all 3 cases the cause was and is lost..
><snip> of list of irrelevant references.
1) Did I ever claim to be better a Dr Reines ?
Did I make ANY remark disparaging Dr Reines in any way ?
Feel free to quote me.
Obviously you are so busy foaming at the mouth, you have stopped
reading and thinking..
Come back when you're preparedto do the second rather the first.
2) And by the way, If you think carefully about the question, I am
willing to bet that there are a whole bunch of things that just about ANY
person in the world can claim to do better than Dr Reines..
Just because he got a Nobel in one thing, does NOT automatically make
him better in other areas..
At best you can claim that his odds are better.
But that's it..
3) Did I imply anything about UCI academic standards ?
Or did you just shut down your brain to better be able to foam at
the mouth..
Since you have in no way COMPARED academic standards between 2
schools, you have demonstrated NOTHING about which is better academically...
That's just simple logic..
4) By the way..
Awards are lousy teachers..
Never met an award that was able to get of it's shelf to teach
anything..
5) A to wether Orion is getting a better education or getting better
opportunities
That may be true and it may not..
But it really depends more on Orion than UCI..
And yes, he should to the best of his ability get his money's worth
6) As top being a pompous asshole..
Anyone with your sig, really should throw that epithet around too
often
What do you think..
Hey..
If your mind is as closed as that of an oyster
Far be it from me to try and open it to let in some light..
But thank you for stating exactly what you are...
> >
> > Ironically in soccer, when you give up doing the levels that you
> > cannot do
> > any more, you can retain your badge as an Emeritus referee..
> > But once they are Emeritus, they are not as involved in the purer form
> > of
> > their art/science, and they effectively can back off working at the
> > heady
> > level where they erarned their recognition
> > And then they can effectively, start relating their experience to
> > those
> > coming up in the field.
> > But by that time, they are not necessarily up to speed of what is
> > happening
> > at the edge of the enveloppe of their field.
>
> A career in Physics is a little beyond that of a soccer referee. But, in
> case you fail in physics at UCI you can probably go for a career in
> soccer refereeing as they have a pretty comprehensive athletics program.
Shows how much you know..
You should find out what soccer referees can make in European and South
American countries..
There was a refere in Chile or Argentina who would get a cut of the gate
because every time he officiated, the atendance increased drastically..
He was making more than some of the professional players.
AS to being prepared by UCI for a career in refereeing, dream on...
Since they do NOT offer USSF training, I seriously doubt that anything they
offer in the UCI athletics department would prepare anyone as a referee..
Particularly since collegiate soccer regulations is not even USSF or FIFA
sanctionned.
> >
> >
> >> >
> >> > As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
> >> > For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket
> > weaving..
> >> >
> >> > Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
> >> >
> >> What balloons have you burst? Seems more like you are digging
> > yourself a
> >> deeper hole with your lack of worldly knowledge.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I didn't realize that "worldy knowledge" required my knowing about a
> > Nobel Prize winner doing 1 undegrad course per year at UCI.
> > Must be a definition local to alt.2600..
>
> The point being that if you can't do a reasonable amount of research so
> you know what you are talking about, you should shut your stupid
> arrogant trap.
>
> I spank you yet again. This is getting tedious and too easy.
>
Why don't you take some time off..
Breathe through your nose for a count of at least 100
And re-read what I wrote with more care..
You're so busy tilting at windmills in your own imagination
That you're no better than a blind Don Quixotte..
Rev Turd Fredericks
You are bragging, and it's all over the soc.culture.quebec and
can.general and mtl.general groups.
> Only in your stupid little mind..
> But then I have always considered that Americans attitude to teaching
> and
> teachers to be very backwards and short-sighted
> Without teachers, this society will collapse
> Notice that I did not write would.
You keep assuming I'm American. But, if you find America so bad, and
that society will collapse because they don't have the same attitude
towards teaching as you do, you should really hightail it back to
Quebec. Which I'm sure is a much better place to live (I case you don't
pick it up, I'm using sarcasm for this one).
> And to presume so ignorantly that a teacher at UQAM may have less
> value that
> a teacher a CUI, because of location, is also presumptuous.
A teachers value can only be measured by the accomplishments of their
students. Without even having to look it up, I can be pretty sure UCI
students accomplish far more than UQAM students.
> I was living in Montreal at the time, so I taught in Montreal
> And since teaching, was to me something I did on the side because the
> University invited me to become an instructor, i see no reason to be
> embarassed by it.
> How many people do you know who get approached by and invited to teach
> at a
> University ?
Virtually everybody I am real life friends with has at one time or other
been invited to teach at a University.
Think about what you are saying mull it over for a bit, and then come
back and tell me what retired players do when they stop actively playing
the game.
If America was really committed to that war it would have been easily
won. In fact it is a fine example of what happens when not enough money
is thrown at a problem.
> The war on Drugs
The war on drugs is another one. If enough money was thrown at it, it
would be won. However, it is not something I agree would be a useful
thing to do.
> Prohibition
See war on drugs.
> In all 3 cases, tons of money and ressources were thrown at the
> problem
> And yet the situations in all 3 cases deteriorated to such a
> point, that
> in all 3 cases the cause was and is lost..
We are talking about education here, not wars. Schools with more
resources are better schools.
No, but you won't admit when you are wrong, and in this case you are
dead wrong.
>
> 2) And by the way, If you think carefully about the question, I am
> willing to bet that there are a whole bunch of things that just about
> ANY
> person in the world can claim to do better than Dr Reines..
> Just because he got a Nobel in one thing, does NOT automatically
> make
> him better in other areas..
> At best you can claim that his odds are better.
> But that's it..
But he's better in Neutrino Physics than anyone in the world, and he
teaches (or taught at UCI). He is an example of the calibre of
researchers and teachers that UCI attracts, and translates directly into
opportunities for students, both graduate and undergraduate.
>
> 3) Did I imply anything about UCI academic standards ?
> Or did you just shut down your brain to better be able to foam
> at
> the mouth..
> Since you have in no way COMPARED academic standards between 2
> schools, you have demonstrated NOTHING about which is better
> academically...
> That's just simple logic..
No you just don't see it. A top ten school in the US vs. a school that
nobody has ever heard of. I'm not even sure UCI would recognize UQAM as
an accredited institution. I'll have to check on that, I'll put it on my
to do list.
>
> 4) By the way..
> Awards are lousy teachers..
> Never met an award that was able to get of it's shelf to
> teach
> anything..
That was a completely dumb interpretation, I will give you the benefit
of the doubt that you didn't read the list of UCI physics profs and
their awards (including teaching awards)
>
> 5) A to wether Orion is getting a better education or getting
> better
> opportunities
> That may be true and it may not..
> But it really depends more on Orion than UCI..
> And yes, he should to the best of his ability get his money's
> worth
That at least we can agree on.
>
> 6) As top being a pompous asshole..
> Anyone with your sig, really should throw that epithet around
> too
> often
> What do you think..
I think you don't understand it.
Just admit you are wrong. You know it, I know it, everybody else that
read my post knows it. You said a stupid thing, I called you on it, you
are wrong. Period.
I'll take the lead here. I know ABSOLUTELY nothing about soccer. They
play it at UCI so somebody must be refereeing it, maybe the referees
learned how to be referees at UCI, maybe they contract out for them, I
just don't know, and frankly I don't really care. So maybe I am WRONG
about being able to get a referee degree/certification/whatever there.
But they do have a great athletics program.
>
>
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > As to what Orion is claiming to be taking as curriculum
>> >> > For all we know, he could also be taking creative basket
>> > weaving..
>> >> >
>> >> > Any other balloons you want me to burst for you, turd-fucker ?
>> >> >
>> >> What balloons have you burst? Seems more like you are digging
>> > yourself a
>> >> deeper hole with your lack of worldly knowledge.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > I didn't realize that "worldy knowledge" required my knowing about
> a
>> > Nobel Prize winner doing 1 undegrad course per year at UCI.
>> > Must be a definition local to alt.2600..
>>
>> The point being that if you can't do a reasonable amount of research
> so
>> you know what you are talking about, you should shut your stupid
>> arrogant trap.
>>
>> I spank you yet again. This is getting tedious and too easy.
>>
>
> Why don't you take some time off..
> Breathe through your nose for a count of at least 100
> And re-read what I wrote with more care..
> You're so busy tilting at windmills in your own imagination
> That you're no better than a blind Don Quixotte..
Because you appear unable to spell correctly (or even close a lot of the
time) I often have to read the junk you write several times, and that is
enough thank you very much.
Peter S. Saly
Really.
Must be true since you say so..
Riiight..
> > Only in your stupid little mind..
> > But then I have always considered that Americans attitude to teaching
> > and
> > teachers to be very backwards and short-sighted
> > Without teachers, this society will collapse
> > Notice that I did not write would.
>
> You keep assuming I'm American. But, if you find America so bad, and
> that society will collapse because they don't have the same attitude
> towards teaching as you do, you should really hightail it back to
> Quebec. Which I'm sure is a much better place to live (I case you don't
> pick it up, I'm using sarcasm for this one).
>
No, I picked up on the fact that you're from Ontario.
And Ontario had picked up the Americans style of social promotion in their
public school system more than 40 years ago..
Quebec did it a little later, because most the the Quebec Ministry of
Education were a bit fearful of the "American Invasion".
I knew a bunch of "educators" in both Ontario and Quebec because of family
relations, And I rememeber the heated debates at family gatherings about
exactly that subject...
>
> > And to presume so ignorantly that a teacher at UQAM may have less
> > value that
> > a teacher a CUI, because of location, is also presumptuous.
>
> A teachers value can only be measured by the accomplishments of their
> students. Without even having to look it up, I can be pretty sure UCI
> students accomplish far more than UQAM students.
>
Accomplish exactly what ?
So according to you, the teacher teaching basket weaving to a university
football player who subsequently goes out and signs a $20 million footbal
contract is worth more than the professor who teaches a 22 year-old how to
teach kindegarden and if lucky make $30,000 a year ?
This reminds me of a story, which I never had a chance to verify, so it
could be urban myth.
It goes that over a period of 20 years, an inordiante number of NHL players
came from a specific poor working-class neighborhood of Montreal.
Research found that the ONLY common factor amongst them was that they had
the same elementary teacher.
And apparently this teacher was a hockey nut.
To the point that she used hockey as a major source of examples and problems
in her teaching. And that she used tickets to games as a reward for the kids
that exceeded expectataions. And that through her, these kids, were able to
have access to the current hockey heroes, which according to the stories
occured during the late Toe Blake and early Scotty Bowman eras.
And these kids got so motivated by her love of the game, that a
disproportionate number of them ended up in the pros..
That's what I call a REAL teacher.
Far to many who stand up in front of a class are not teachers.
They're "lecturers" and "class managers"
They stand up and deliver the curriculum, and not much else.
That's not teaching.
And sadly most universities, have "lecturers" and not "teachers" to give
undergrad classes..And it's most probably quite true of UCI...
There is no real accomplishement or achievement as a teacher, when you are
teaching to a group that has been culled to do the work required.
The real teaching is done elsewhere..
To me a real teacher, is the one who goes to Afghanistan to teach girls to
read and write., Or who can take the tough kids who believe thay have no
future and shows them that they not only have possibilities, but that the
only limit isone that they define themselves..
Compared to that, the instructors at a place like UQAM or UCI, are
accomplishing nothing at all..
> > I was living in Montreal at the time, so I taught in Montreal
> > And since teaching, was to me something I did on the side because the
> > University invited me to become an instructor, i see no reason to be
> > embarassed by it.
> > How many people do you know who get approached by and invited to teach
> > at a
> > University ?
>
> Virtually everybody I am real life friends with has at one time or other
> been invited to teach at a University.
>
Really ?
It's a good thing you used the word "virtually"..
It's such a broad qualifier, that it virtually applies to everyone on this
planet..
Oh with what a BROAD brush you paint..
But that is why your responses are suche weasel responses
You are quite correct that most coaches are retired players
But how many of them were "successful " players who made to higher levels of
the game ?
VERY FEW..
Are you going to tell me that he taught Physiscs 101 ?
I doubt it.
Maybe he taught mechaincs 201 ?
Or Electromagnetism 301 ?
I still doubt it.
Once again you paint with the BROAD brush..
For very obvious reasons that you are glossing over, he wouldn't have been
teaching something not related to his expertise
And Neutrino Physics is a very small and specialised subset of the field
His exposure to the student body, was most likely VERY, VERY limited
(But feel free to dig up old course calendars to prove me wrong)
So I ask again
How many students did he actually teach per term ?
What proportion was that number relative to the complete student body ?
You are COMPLETELY wrong..
The referees that do NCAA and other college games are usually USSF referees
who were trained by USSF
Because College soccer is NOT sanctionned by USSF
Getting to referee College is a bit like joining a private hunting preserve
You have to be invited.
But 99.99% of college refs were trained by USSF.
All they did was learn the NCAA rules, which are only slightly different
from USSF
NISOA is one of the bodies involved with College Soccer refereeing
The individual schools have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with training the
referees used in College games for the very simple reason, that it
eliminates the posssibility of accusations of impropriety because a referee
"belonged" to a particular school...
Actually the same is true for most if not all College sports
The same is true for High school.
Well,
That's too bad..
You want to read my stuff, you'll have to live with my spelling errors.
And ragging on about something that cannot be changed just shows that
you have other issues to deal with..
Rev Turd Fredericks
set by the local school board. I knew a number of kids who failed,
mostly due to behavioral problems (not able to concentrate in the days
before Ritalin, and such other problems), not many mind you, but they
did fail.
>
>>
>> > And to presume so ignorantly that a teacher at UQAM may have less
>> > value that
>> > a teacher a CUI, because of location, is also presumptuous.
>>
>> A teachers value can only be measured by the accomplishments of
> their
>> students. Without even having to look it up, I can be pretty sure
> UCI
>> students accomplish far more than UQAM students.
>>
>
> Accomplish exactly what ?
> So according to you, the teacher teaching basket weaving to a
> university
> football player who subsequently goes out and signs a $20 million
> footbal
> contract is worth more than the professor who teaches a 22 year-old
> how to
> teach kindegarden and if lucky make $30,000 a year ?
I would say it depends on your operational definition of
accomplishments, but I'm perhaps being too general. I didn't mean
monetary accomplishments as a be all and end all of accomplishment, but
you seem to see it that way. I don't really know how many football or
other sports players have come from UCI, frankly their teams aren't that
good (because it is an academically inclined university, not a sports
mill). However, there is more to an athletics program than just
producing football players. You aren't going to go far in a Sports
Medicine program without education in Athletics (you can review their
program and facilities here
http://www.sportsmed.uci.edu/staff_toc.html). So even the lowly football
player gets a good education from well qualified teachers as a spinoff
of the sports medicine program. So, in a way teaching a football player
to become a good football player and not get injured is an
accomplishment.
>
> This reminds me of a story, which I never had a chance to verify, so
> it
> could be urban myth.
> It goes that over a period of 20 years, an inordiante number of NHL
> players
> came from a specific poor working-class neighborhood of Montreal.
> Research found that the ONLY common factor amongst them was that they
> had
> the same elementary teacher.
> And apparently this teacher was a hockey nut.
> To the point that she used hockey as a major source of examples and
> problems
> in her teaching. And that she used tickets to games as a reward for
> the kids
> that exceeded expectataions. And that through her, these kids, were
> able to
> have access to the current hockey heroes, which according to the
> stories
> occured during the late Toe Blake and early Scotty Bowman eras.
> And these kids got so motivated by her love of the game, that a
> disproportionate number of them ended up in the pros..
>
> That's what I call a REAL teacher.
I have to agree with you on that point, and, for once, it doesn't really
matter if it's true, because it illustrates an ideal (quite well
actually) not a boast.
> Far to many who stand up in front of a class are not teachers.
> They're "lecturers" and "class managers"
> They stand up and deliver the curriculum, and not much else.
> That's not teaching.
> And sadly most universities, have "lecturers" and not "teachers"
> to give
> undergrad classes..And it's most probably quite true of UCI...
UCI has a more or less open door policy in regards to student access to
professors. All professors are required to keep office hours, and any
student is free to get "one on one" if they so choose (probably true of
most universities). If a student chooses to blow away the opportunity of
office hours, that's their problem. The whole undergraduate experience
is designed to weed out the disinterested. Typical 1st year undergrade
required courses will have a hundred or more students, many of whom drop
out when they realize the difficulty level of the subject matter, and
the amount of work involved, this has nothing to do with teaching. As
the years progress class sizes get smaller and that is where the real
teaching takes place. All universities are like this especially for the
broader disciplined subjects (Psychology, Engineering, Computer Science
etc.). That's just the way it is. As a student progresses in his career,
he is in a position to get more out of his teachers. One of the basis
for promotion of a Professor at UCI (and the UC system in general) is
how many students they graduate, and how many masters/PhD. students they
produce. They can have a great research resume, but if they don't teach
enough quality students they don't get a raise. However, this is not
another form of "social promotion" because there is a tight system of
checks and balances in place which prevents a professor from just simply
passing a student. The system is a little complex to go into here, but I
can say that teacher evaluations are collected and taken seriously. Poor
evaluations go on a professor's record as do good ones, and the raw data
is kept for 5-7 years to track a professor's progress of
improvemnt/decline. The same is done for TA's before they are invited
back.
>
> There is no real accomplishement or achievement as a teacher, when you
> are
> teaching to a group that has been culled to do the work required.
> The real teaching is done elsewhere..
>
> To me a real teacher, is the one who goes to Afghanistan to teach
> girls to
> read and write., Or who can take the tough kids who believe thay have
> no
> future and shows them that they not only have possibilities, but that
> the
> only limit isone that they define themselves..
I hate to admit it, but I am forced to agree with you again (maybe you
are finally coming around and behaving like a reasonable person). I read
a really good book by a teacher teaching in the Jane/Finch corridor in
Toronto. It should be required reading for all those that would dare to
teach. (I just can't remember the name of the book or the author).
> Compared to that, the instructors at a place like UQAM or UCI, are
> accomplishing nothing at all..
If just one instructor were to instruct one student which went on to
find a cure for Alzheimer's disease or Cancer they would have
accomplished plenty.
>
>
>> > I was living in Montreal at the time, so I taught in Montreal
>> > And since teaching, was to me something I did on the side because
> the
>> > University invited me to become an instructor, i see no reason to
> be
>> > embarassed by it.
>> > How many people do you know who get approached by and invited to
> teach
>> > at a
>> > University ?
>>
>> Virtually everybody I am real life friends with has at one time or
> other
>> been invited to teach at a University.
>>
>
> Really ?
> It's a good thing you used the word "virtually"..
> It's such a broad qualifier, that it virtually applies to everyone on
> this
> planet..
OK. Since moving to California, I have made 7 of what I would call
"close friends" 5 of whom either do teach at university or have taught
at university, one is an artist/art student and the other was a
librarian (they are teachers too) now working in private industry. So,
depending on whether you would classify the librarian as a teacher,
virtually all (6/7) my real life friends have been invited to teach at
university. The librarian is a difficult one because he was an expert in
rare books and book restoration, and has given seminars on such, but not
as a for credit course.
Just off the top of my head: Patt Quinn, Cal Ripkin Sr., Glen Sather,
Billy Martin, and I'm not even much of a sports fan.
First, I must apologise It appears, after doing some more research on
Dr. Reines that he died in 1998 and therefore could not have taught in
1999 (obviously this is also why he is no longer teaching). Some of the
pages about him were out of date. The last undergrad course he taught
was 1997 and was an undergrad thesis course.
No. The undergraduate course he last taught was called a "199" which is
for a small group of students (usually between 2 and 10 seniors) to work
together or alone on a research project under the direct supervision of
the professor. Sometimes this can include working directly with the
professor on HIS research in his lab, or could be a thesis type project
where the student constructs an hypothesis and sets about proving it
using whichever resources the professor makes available to him. The one
I was most impressed with at UCI was called the "Electric Vehicle
Project" (not related to the nobel prize winner) where students worked
alongside a retired professor on problems related to producing and
maintaining fuel cells for electric vehicles. Seems Toyota and GM were
pretty impressed too because they donated some electric vehicles to the
cause. Here is an URL for some students resume who apparently worked on
the project: http://www.eng.uci.edu/ieee/Resumes/My%20Resume.htm
>
> Once again you paint with the BROAD brush..
> For very obvious reasons that you are glossing over, he wouldn't have
> been
> teaching something not related to his expertise
> And Neutrino Physics is a very small and specialised subset of the
> field
> His exposure to the student body, was most likely VERY, VERY limited
> (But feel free to dig up old course calendars to prove me wrong)
> So I ask again
> How many students did he actually teach per term ?
> What proportion was that number relative to the complete student
> body ?
See above. However, in answer to your question, he bagan at UCI in 1966
so would have taught literally 1000's of undergrad students before he
even won his nobel prize. This would have included a good number of
undergrad courses.
It can easily be changed with a spell checker and you know it.
Peter S. Saly
> Peter S. Saly wrote:
> >
> > "Rev Turd Fredericks" <turd...@catholic.org> wrote in message
> > news:PM0003928...@dhcppc1.home.com...
No shit..
That's a true accomplishment..
Taking 4 years to teach a football player not ot get hurt..
Sounds exactly similar to UQAM
Except that more emphasis is put on teaching.
Cutting edge research is not necessarily required to be a good teaching
school..
And when I was there, teaching was the first priority
At least in the Math & Comp Sci department.
All Math & Comp Sci Instructors who made the lower 50% of the total UQAM
evaluations were put on short notice, and someone was assigned to oversee
their class work..
>
> >
> > There is no real accomplishement or achievement as a teacher, when you
> > are
> > teaching to a group that has been culled to do the work required.
> > The real teaching is done elsewhere..
> >
> > To me a real teacher, is the one who goes to Afghanistan to teach
> > girls to
> > read and write., Or who can take the tough kids who believe thay have
> > no
> > future and shows them that they not only have possibilities, but that
> > the
> > only limit isone that they define themselves..
>
> I hate to admit it, but I am forced to agree with you again (maybe you
> are finally coming around and behaving like a reasonable person). I read
> a really good book by a teacher teaching in the Jane/Finch corridor in
> Toronto. It should be required reading for all those that would dare to
> teach. (I just can't remember the name of the book or the author).
>
If you remember the book, I would appreciate the data which you can send by
e-mail..
As to the behavior of a reasonable person, you are in no position to pass
judgement on that yourself..
> > Compared to that, the instructors at a place like UQAM or UCI, are
> > accomplishing nothing at all..
>
> If just one instructor were to instruct one student which went on to
> find a cure for Alzheimer's disease or Cancer they would have
> accomplished plenty.
>
The problem with that posit, is that it would be hard to identify which of
the teachers had the key effect..
Was it the 1st grade teacher ? or the Intermediate Algebra and Trig teacher
in grade 9 ot maybe an instructor who was able to consistently make a light
bulb go off in his head in English or History
And finally, that approach also tends to reduce the value of the input made
by the student..
Teacher's are like farmers.
Their job is to plant seeds.
Most seed will just grow up to be average plants..
But every once in a while a seed will grow into something extraordinarily
unexpected.
Maybe because of the teacher who put it there, or maybe from some event in
the life of the student..
There is really no way for an outsider to be able to tell.
To abuse a military temr
Maybe you just fell into a "target rich environment" :-)..
But I suspect, you are the exception and not the rule..
Well.
I actually did something similar with my Systems Analysis students.
Instead of teaching them the fine art of flowcharting which was the course
before I took it.
I approached it from the point of view of the Analyst being a Consultant who
not only has to identify a problem, but then decide if the problem is
solvable, then sell the solution as a cost-effective project before actually
going in and doing it..
I was lucky to have a bunch of business, large and small who were willing to
hand over small enough projects to be handled in this fashion
As word got around, after a few years, my available project list grew so
long that typically more than 80 were not even used on a term-by-term
basis..
Many of the students also got contracts or jobs to complete the projects.
Pretty heady stuff for graduating undergrads to already be working with and
getting paid by businesses in their chosen fields before their name is even
inked on their diplomas..
>
> >
> > Once again you paint with the BROAD brush..
> > For very obvious reasons that you are glossing over, he wouldn't have
> > been
> > teaching something not related to his expertise
> > And Neutrino Physics is a very small and specialised subset of the
> > field
> > His exposure to the student body, was most likely VERY, VERY limited
> > (But feel free to dig up old course calendars to prove me wrong)
> > So I ask again
> > How many students did he actually teach per term ?
> > What proportion was that number relative to the complete student
> > body ?
> See above. However, in answer to your question, he bagan at UCI in 1966
> so would have taught literally 1000's of undergrad students before he
> even won his nobel prize. This would have included a good number of
> undergrad courses.
>
But again, thoses 1000s represent what percentile of the TOTAL count of
students passing through UCI during that same period ?
> >
> > Well,
> > That's too bad..
> > You want to read my stuff, you'll have to live with my spelling errors.
> > And ragging on about something that cannot be changed just shows
> > that you have other issues to deal with..
> >
> It can easily be changed with a spell checker and you know it.
>
<sigh>
You insist, but sadly it isn't so...
As I mentionned elsewhere, since I am unable to distinguish the correct from
the incorrect because my brain shows me what it remembers to be correct.
For example,
If I write "taht" or "that", and then come back to proofread, I am
completely unable to see the difference when the problem kicks in..
Then if I use the spell-checker, for a while it will only contain "that",
but sooner or later a "taht" will creep in.
And then the spell checker with come back asking which of the "that" or
"taht" is correct..
Then a "tajt" will creep in
Then a "tsht" or a "tsjt"...
And so on and so on..
Now compound the problem with wrting in 3 languages
I can usually cath the errors if I type slowly enough to be able to see the
individual letters appear in sequence..
But I often do not watch the screen as I am touch-typing..
And therefore I will miss things, and subsequently not see them
afterwards.
This is how I ended up with a spell-checker file exceeding 25 gig
Too bad that I ALREADY know from repeated experience, that a spell-checker
will not help me for long and become more of a problem than my problem
actually is..
Rev Turd Fredericks
If the football player is going to make $20 million it certainly is. The
point is, no matter what you teach it is important to somebody if you do
it well, or did you miss that?
At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch professionals, they
have top notch equipment as well.
I will. I remember the cover of the book, it had a wall with "The
Boomtown Rats" scrawled on it in either spraypaint or chalk.
>
> As to the behavior of a reasonable person, you are in no position to
> pass
> judgement on that yourself..
I am the most reasonable man you will ever have the pleasure to
communicate with, but I know you knew that already. That's why people
like me.
>
>
>> > Compared to that, the instructors at a place like UQAM or UCI, are
>> > accomplishing nothing at all..
>>
>> If just one instructor were to instruct one student which went on to
>> find a cure for Alzheimer's disease or Cancer they would have
>> accomplished plenty.
>>
>
> The problem with that posit, is that it would be hard to identify
> which of
> the teachers had the key effect..
> Was it the 1st grade teacher ? or the Intermediate Algebra and Trig
> teacher
> in grade 9 ot maybe an instructor who was able to consistently make a
> light
> bulb go off in his head in English or History.
I don't think 1st and 9th grade teachers instruct about the vagueries of
research on Alzheimer's disease. Research like that is done only in
universities, and so the grade 9 teacher is out of the loop.
> And finally, that approach also tends to reduce the value of the input
> made
> by the student..
> Teacher's are like farmers.
> Their job is to plant seeds.
> Most seed will just grow up to be average plants..
> But every once in a while a seed will grow into something
> extraordinarily
> unexpected.
> Maybe because of the teacher who put it there, or maybe from some
> event in
> the life of the student..
> There is really no way for an outsider to be able to tell.
>
>
Who cares as long as it has the desired effect? Nobody at UQAM is going
to find the cure for Alzheimer's disease but somebody at UCI might.
Yes, I am in a "taget rich environment" but I am smart, and I attract
people like that, otherwise, they wouldn't be my friends. They like me,
and I am up to speed with them. They can discuss things intelligently
with me and I respond intelligently. In the process, we learn things
from each other. When was the last time you got to help a real scientist
with statistics?
Yes, and it's the norm for UCI students if they're bright enough and
take their studies seriously, but it's not a given which is the way it
should be. That's why Irvine consists of mainly high tech companies. It
certainly isn't because of the cost of living which is quite high.
Who cares? They got taught by the best in the field.
You hide behind the disability. As Dirty Harry would say "A man's got to
know his limitations"
Peter S. Saly
God but you are so thick..
a) While you are at it.
Look up the meaning of the term IRONY..
Aply it to my preceding comments
b) I NEVER disagreed on the point that waulity teaching exists
INDEPENDENT of the school in question, contrary to your pretensions that
some schools are better at teaching because the may have Nobel Prize winners
c) You made the remark about a university taking 4 years to teach a
football player not to hurt himself.
Any school that needs 4 years to teach a football player not to hurt
himself can't be that good..
d) This is even more droll when you consider the types and quantities of
injuries that football players syffer constantly.
Obviously this kind of training is not very effective
Yeah you said that before..
So ?
Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try to slam me..
Ok
At least it's a clue..
> >
> > As to the behavior of a reasonable person, you are in no position to
> > pass
> > judgement on that yourself..
>
> I am the most reasonable man you will ever have the pleasure to
> communicate with, but I know you knew that already. That's why people
> like me.
>
I have met a lot of people who claim to be reasonable..
Most people consider themselves "reasonable"
But one has only to look at the actions of such "reasonable" people
throughout history to know that such claims indicate nothing..
> >
> >
> >> > Compared to that, the instructors at a place like UQAM or UCI, are
> >> > accomplishing nothing at all..
> >>
> >> If just one instructor were to instruct one student which went on to
> >> find a cure for Alzheimer's disease or Cancer they would have
> >> accomplished plenty.
> >>
> >
> > The problem with that posit, is that it would be hard to identify
> > which of
> > the teachers had the key effect..
> > Was it the 1st grade teacher ? or the Intermediate Algebra and Trig
> > teacher
> > in grade 9 ot maybe an instructor who was able to consistently make a
> > light
> > bulb go off in his head in English or History.
>
> I don't think 1st and 9th grade teachers instruct about the vagueries of
> research on Alzheimer's disease. Research like that is done only in
> universities, and so the grade 9 teacher is out of the loop.
>
Really ?
Yet the 1st or 9th grade teachers are the ones that:
motivate people to go into medicine or to drop out
that teach you work habits or let you get away with goofing off..
that teach you the basic math or lab skills that wiil be used in later
work
You don't think that such skills are without effect ?
Education is a road traveled with many stops, twists and turns.
To claim that early steps along that road has no effect on the ones that
follow, is naive at best..
To claim that early preparation has no effect on latter succes goes agains
ALL the evidence that is currently accepted by most educators.
>
> > And finally, that approach also tends to reduce the value of the input
> > made
> > by the student..
> > Teacher's are like farmers.
> > Their job is to plant seeds.
> > Most seed will just grow up to be average plants..
> > But every once in a while a seed will grow into something
> > extraordinarily
> > unexpected.
> > Maybe because of the teacher who put it there, or maybe from some
> > event in
> > the life of the student..
> > There is really no way for an outsider to be able to tell.
> >
> >
> Who cares as long as it has the desired effect? Nobody at UQAM is going
> to find the cure for Alzheimer's disease but somebody at UCI might.
>
And you can state that categorically ?
How do you know that no one is working on Alzheimer's at UQAM ?
Such a claim is stupidly arrogant at best..
But frankly, I am not that surprised that you are foolish enough to make
it..
> >>
> >
> > To abuse a military temr
> > Maybe you just fell into a "target rich environment" :-)..
> > But I suspect, you are the exception and not the rule..
>
> Yes, I am in a "taget rich environment" but I am smart, and I attract
> people like that, otherwise, they wouldn't be my friends. They like me,
> and I am up to speed with them. They can discuss things intelligently
> with me and I respond intelligently. In the process, we learn things
> from each other. When was the last time you got to help a real scientist
> with statistics?
>
Considering your last claim
"Who cares as long as it has the desired effect? Nobody at UQAM is going
to find the cure for Alzheimer's disease but somebody at UCI might."
You are not that smart..
At best your arrogantly stupid..
Hello ?
This whole discussion is about your claim that the whole student body gains
from the presence of a Nobel Prize winner on campus..
Apparently to you this is an osmotic benefit, even thought the near majority
have hardly any contact with an individual who taught a specialed graduate
class and has died since...
You say
"Who cares? They got taught by the best in the field."
Apparently the students had NO ACCESS to the best of the field..
Your claim does NOT stand for the GREAT majority of UCI students
I don't hide..
If I did hide I would DENY it's existence..
On the contrary, I openly admit its existence..
I do know EXACTLY my limitations
What offends you, is that I don't consider you worthy enough to take
the extra effort and cost of paying for a proof-reader so that YOU are not
disturbed by MY problem..
Actually that just shows that you really are not only an insensititve
twit, but a hypocritical one as well..
Rev Turd Fredericks
Schools with Nobel prize winners have better teaching resources and
attract better smarter teachers.
> c) You made the remark about a university taking 4 years to teach a
> football player not to hurt himself.
> Any school that needs 4 years to teach a football player not
> to hurt
> himself can't be that good..
That was just a quick example dumbshit.
> d) This is even more droll when you consider the types and
> quantities of
> injuries that football players syffer constantly.
> Obviously this kind of training is not very effective
See above. You just simply aren't capable of understanding anything that
isn't explicitly spelled out to you. You are playing what they call a
game of "silly boy". A silly boy will, when told the sky is blue, will
counter with "no the sky is grey" because it is cloudy at that
particular time. This does not change the fact that the sky is blue, and
the silly boy is just being silly to be a pain in the ass and avoid
admitting the truth.
>>
>> At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch professionals,
> they
>> have top notch equipment as well.
>>
>
> Yeah you said that before..
> So ?
> Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
Yes, you said it yourself "UQAM is a teaching university"
>
> By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
> I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
> Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try to slam
> me..
>
You are lying agin. Just so not to get diverted from the central
argument by playing yet another of your he said she said games, look it
up in the archive.
>> >
>> > As to the behavior of a reasonable person, you are in no position
> to
>> > pass
>> > judgement on that yourself..
>>
>> I am the most reasonable man you will ever have the pleasure to
>> communicate with, but I know you knew that already. That's why
> people
>> like me.
>>
>
> I have met a lot of people who claim to be reasonable..
> Most people consider themselves "reasonable"
> But one has only to look at the actions of such "reasonable" people
> throughout history to know that such claims indicate nothing..
Well now, it appears people like me, and they don't like you, so I would
say I have people to back up my claim and you don't.
No I don't. There is really nothing that you learn in the early grades
that prepare you for a life of researching anything, except teaching you
to read and write and do arithmatic.
>
> Education is a road traveled with many stops, twists and turns.
> To claim that early steps along that road has no effect on the
> ones that
> follow, is naive at best..
> To claim that early preparation has no effect on latter succes goes
> agains
> ALL the evidence that is currently accepted by most educators.
>
The same "educators" that produce students that can't read and write.
The same educators that go on expensive retreats to Cancun instead of
using the money to teach the kids or at least make their classrooms
comfortable. Yeah, I believe what they say.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > And finally, that approach also tends to reduce the value of the
> input
>> > made
>> > by the student..
>> > Teacher's are like farmers.
>> > Their job is to plant seeds.
>> > Most seed will just grow up to be average plants..
>> > But every once in a while a seed will grow into something
>> > extraordinarily
>> > unexpected.
>> > Maybe because of the teacher who put it there, or maybe from some
>> > event in
>> > the life of the student..
>> > There is really no way for an outsider to be able to tell.
>> >
>> >
>> Who cares as long as it has the desired effect? Nobody at UQAM is
> going
>> to find the cure for Alzheimer's disease but somebody at UCI might.
>>
>
> And you can state that categorically ?
> How do you know that no one is working on Alzheimer's at UQAM ?
You told me yourself that it was a teaching university.
>
> Such a claim is stupidly arrogant at best..
> But frankly, I am not that surprised that you are foolish enough
> to make
> it..
Pay more attention to what you write before calling somebody else
foolish.
>
>
>> >>
>> >
>> > To abuse a military temr
>> > Maybe you just fell into a "target rich environment" :-)..
>> > But I suspect, you are the exception and not the rule..
>>
>> Yes, I am in a "taget rich environment" but I am smart, and I
> attract
>> people like that, otherwise, they wouldn't be my friends. They like
> me,
>> and I am up to speed with them. They can discuss things
> intelligently
>> with me and I respond intelligently. In the process, we learn things
>> from each other. When was the last time you got to help a real
> scientist
>> with statistics?
>>
>
> Considering your last claim
> "Who cares as long as it has the desired effect? Nobody at UQAM is
> going
> to find the cure for Alzheimer's disease but somebody at UCI might."
> You are not that smart..
> At best your arrogantly stupid..
>
That's much better than being certainly stupid.
It appears from a quick google search that nobody at UQAM is working on
cures or even basic treatments for Alzheimer's, but there does seem to
be some sort of daycare worker training in the sociology department
there.
Why is that? A university with the capacity to produce a Nobel prize
winner (or in UCI's case 2 Nobel prize winners) also attracts better and
brighter faculty members than second and third rate universities. The
students, therefore, get taught by those that are among the best in the
field. This is what makes Harvard Law school a better law school than
Whittier Law School (in Orange county California), and makes Harvard
Business school better than Devry. You would be hard pressed to deny
this.
It would be interesting to find out how many papers on Alzheimer's
disease research were presented by UQAM faculty at the recent
neuroscience conference in San Diego.
See, you're doing it again. Trying to hide behind your disability and
using it like a smoke bomb to cloud the issue that you are lazy. And
please, tell us all what this mysterious disability is, I'm dying to
know.
Peter S. Saly
Thank you for continuing to demonstrate that you are indeed thick..
But then, anybody who needs to refer to himself as a "Reverend" has already
some self-image issues.
>
> > c) You made the remark about a university taking 4 years to teach a
> > football player not to hurt himself.
> > Any school that needs 4 years to teach a football player not
> > to hurt himself can't be that good..
>
> That was just a quick example dumbshit.
>
So ?
This 'dumbshit" demonstrated that your quick example wasn't worth that
much.
Must rile you some, to have a "dumbshit" demonstrate taht you're just an
idiot..
>
> > d) This is even more droll when you consider the types and
> > quantities of injuries that football players syffer constantly.
> > Obviously this kind of training is not very effective
>
> See above. You just simply aren't capable of understanding anything that
> isn't explicitly spelled out to you. You are playing what they call a
> game of "silly boy". A silly boy will, when told the sky is blue, will
> counter with "no the sky is grey" because it is cloudy at that
> particular time. This does not change the fact that the sky is blue, and
> the silly boy is just being silly to be a pain in the ass and avoid
> admitting the truth.
>
A more insults..
But hey it takes an idiot to declare the "sky is blue" as an absolute..
By the way, what's the color of the "sky" when seen from space ?
Blue ?
Too bad that you just gave us another idiot example of why you're more a
turd than worthy of reverence..
> >>
> >> At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch professionals,
> > they have top notch equipment as well.
> >>
> >
> > Yeah you said that before..
> > So ?
> > Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
>
> Yes, you said it yourself "UQAM is a teaching university"
>
And ?
Does that imply that UQAM has no teaching "equipment" ?
You are assuming again in your desperate need..
> >
> > By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
> > I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
> > Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try to slam
> > me..
> >
> You are lying agin. Just so not to get diverted from the central
> argument by playing yet another of your he said she said games, look it
> up in the archive.
>
Try to quote me..
Youll be more credible..
And do it in context,
That is if you even know what that means...
>
> >> >
> >> > As to the behavior of a reasonable person, you are in no position
> > to
> >> > pass
> >> > judgement on that yourself..
> >>
> >> I am the most reasonable man you will ever have the pleasure to
> >> communicate with, but I know you knew that already. That's why
> > people
> >> like me.
> >>
> >
> > I have met a lot of people who claim to be reasonable..
> > Most people consider themselves "reasonable"
> > But one has only to look at the actions of such "reasonable" people
> > throughout history to know that such claims indicate nothing..
>
> Well now, it appears people like me, and they don't like you, so I would
> say I have people to back up my claim and you don't.
>
Wow..
What a BROAD generalisation
But so what ?
There's a whole bunch of people who like Bin Ladden..
That some people like you, proves nothing.
As to tryinh to make that claim, that because "peoeple like you", your claim
has any leg to stand on..
Well, it's just another demonstration of "turd logic"..
Obviously, you've had problems with the reading and writing at that level..
But you are quite wrong..
There is quite a lot more that you learn in the early years
Such as thinking logically, getting organized, planning your work, doing
your work, learning to stick with it, to name a few..
Without any of these, you will never be anywhere near capable to go trhough
any form of higher education
And by the way, I know a lot of people who did "research projects" LONG
before they hit university..
Maybe you should depend less on who likes you, and try supporting your
posits with better evidence..
>
> >
> > Education is a road traveled with many stops, twists and turns.
> > To claim that early steps along that road has no effect on the
> > ones that
> > follow, is naive at best..
> > To claim that early preparation has no effect on latter succes goes
> > agains ALL the evidence that is currently accepted by most educators.
> >
> The same "educators" that produce students that can't read and write.
> The same educators that go on expensive retreats to Cancun instead of
> using the money to teach the kids or at least make their classrooms
> comfortable. Yeah, I believe what they say.
>
Oh dear, another stupidly pretentiouns generalization..
If this is the level of education you got, to achieve your ability to
"think", as demonstrated here..
You have my sympathies..
Fortunately, most people do not confuse administrators with educators..
And from there, to smear all educators and aministrators because of the
abuses of a few, just demonstrates again, your own limitations
..
ramalane
"Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com> wrote in message
news:tvl3kir...@corp.supernews.com...
<snipped for clarity>
: There is quite a lot more that you learn in the early years
: Such as thinking logically, getting organized, planning your work, doing
: your work, learning to stick with it, to name a few..
: Without any of these, you will never be anywhere near capable to go
trhough
: any form of higher education
: And by the way, I know a lot of people who did "research projects" LONG
: before they hit university..
: Maybe you should depend less on who likes you, and try supporting your
: posits with better evidence..
I only dislike you because you're an idiot.
HTH
/ramalane
--
Alt.Hackers.Malicious Survival Guide
http://www.ramalane.com
"I've got the FBI so far up my ass
I can taste Brylcreem" -Junior Soprano
".... nothing says "I love you" like a new ballcock
in your tank and a good mounting screw"- ThePsyko
Iceman
wrote:
Peter, it is painfully obvious that you just proved his "Silly Boy"
argument, you silly boy.
Then you followed it up with temper tantrums of a silly boy to further
bolster his argument.
These things are not taught in school, they are taught at home and via
experience. Thinking logically? Puleaseeee, give me one example of
that in grammar school.
>Without any of these, you will never be anywhere near capable to go trhough
>any form of higher education
>And by the way, I know a lot of people who did "research projects" LONG
>before they hit university..
Hint: silly sally, your key word is BEFORE! not after.
>Maybe you should depend less on who likes you, and try supporting your
>posits with better evidence..
>
Back up your statements with facts, not conjecture or allusions. (I
never see any evidence from you, other than your stupidity)
Peter, you failed to answer this question, again. You constantly
allude to the "Fact" that you have something similar to dyslexia, but
never state what it is. If what you "have" is real then there would be
a name for it. If you were the 1st to have it, then it would be named
after you, aka Silly Sally Syndrome"
You always allude, never stating the facts, you try to give the
appearance of intellect, but the real fact is that there seems to be
none as evidenced by you writings, name calling, false aspersions,
etc.
So to reiterate; you have something similar to dyslexia, you have
taken math engineering courses, you had lots of schooling. No degrees,
no timetable, no name for your disease. Retired, yet not retired,
possibly off on disability. On and on.
Pure simple logic would have it that, you sir, are a fraud!
Rev Turd Fredericks
dispute the argument I made below about Harvard etc. So who is the
"thick" one?
I do not simply call myself Reverend, I am one. It's not that hard to
become a Reverend, even you could do it.
>
>>
>> > c) You made the remark about a university taking 4 years to
> teach a
>> > football player not to hurt himself.
>> > Any school that needs 4 years to teach a football player
> not
>> > to hurt himself can't be that good..
>>
>> That was just a quick example dumbshit.
>>
>
> So ?
> This 'dumbshit" demonstrated that your quick example wasn't worth
> that
> much.
> Must rile you some, to have a "dumbshit" demonstrate taht you're just
> an
> idiot..
I guess my quick example wasn't worth that much, but only because you
fail to understand it. I tried to make it simple for you. I know
everybody else in this group "got it". Better get that neural tube of
yours checked again, I think you need to get more of the rotten part cut
out.
>
>
>
>>
>> > d) This is even more droll when you consider the types and
>> > quantities of injuries that football players syffer constantly.
>> > Obviously this kind of training is not very effective
>>
>> See above. You just simply aren't capable of understanding anything
> that
>> isn't explicitly spelled out to you. You are playing what they call
> a
>> game of "silly boy". A silly boy will, when told the sky is blue,
> will
>> counter with "no the sky is grey" because it is cloudy at that
>> particular time. This does not change the fact that the sky is blue,
> and
>> the silly boy is just being silly to be a pain in the ass and avoid
>> admitting the truth.
>>
>
> A more insults..
> But hey it takes an idiot to declare the "sky is blue" as an
> absolute..
> By the way, what's the color of the "sky" when seen from space ?
> Blue ?
> Too bad that you just gave us another idiot example of why you're more
> a
> turd than worthy of reverence..
Ask somebody what color the sky is, 9 out of ten people will say blue,
and the tenth is the silly boy who gives some other answer just to get
attention. Seems like you're number 10.
>
>
>
>
>> >>
>> >> At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch
> professionals,
>> > they have top notch equipment as well.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Yeah you said that before..
>> > So ?
>> > Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
>>
>> Yes, you said it yourself "UQAM is a teaching university"
>>
>
> And ?
> Does that imply that UQAM has no teaching "equipment" ?
> You are assuming again in your desperate need..
>
It says what it says. Again, you are trying to use your falacious tactic
of clouding the issue so you don't have to admit you are wrong. Face it,
UCI is a better university than UQAM, they have better teachers, higher
standards, better equipment, and the capacity to produce Nobel prize
winners which ultimately benefits the students.
>
>> >
>> > By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
>> > I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
>> > Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try to
> slam
>> > me..
>> >
>> You are lying agin. Just so not to get diverted from the central
>> argument by playing yet another of your he said she said games, look
> it
>> up in the archive.
>>
>
> Try to quote me..
> Youll be more credible..
> And do it in context,
> That is if you even know what that means...
Here you go again. Quote yourself. It was a post you made to Orion. But
it was just a case of you putting your foot in your mouth again by
venturing into areas you know little about. Like I said before, you come
to a gunfight with a pointed stick and wonder why you get your ass
kicked so easily.
Yeah, but at least people like me. My logic proves a lot about you
because people don't like you. So far, I've seen people I have never
heard of come to this group just to show their dislike for you. It's
obvious you're not liked. Maybe if you weren't such a jerk, you would
have to spend less energy defending your ego, and actually make some
friends.
> ...
Rev Turd Fredericks
> As a matter of fact it's so easy, who would want it ?
> Only someone like you..
> So sad..
>
Why do you say it's sad? What is sad is that you would go so far as to
deride somebody that is a reverend just to try and prop up your ego.
> Naturallly
> That fact that YOUR example was a dud, was not YOUR fault, but mine..
> GROW UP..
But it is your fault, because you didn't understand it and failed to ask
clarifying questions. Instead, you put the example down as being a dud.
Is that how you treated your students? If so, it kind of explains why
you no longer teach.
> So what ?
>
> On a cloudy day, is the sky blue ?
> At night is the sky blue ?
> Only idiots, make such imprecise generalisations base on popular
> assumptions..
> A long time ago 10 people out of 10 believed that world was flat and
> that
> the sun revolved around the earth..
> They were proven to be wrong as knowledge increased.
> That fact that you need to fall back on such an old canard as wether
> the sky
> is blue or not, just goes to show what an idiot you are..
Fuck are you stupid. We were talking about you playing silly boy not a
debate about the various shades of the sky or the flatness or lack of
flatness of the earth. This is yet again another example of you trying
to divert attention away from the central argument. This lame tactic may
work with others, but it doesn't work with me. Would you have perhaps
prefered that I just simply said you were playing silly boy without a
proper explanation of the rules of playing silly boy?
>
>
>
> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch
>> > professionals,
>> >> > they have top notch equipment as well.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Yeah you said that before..
>> >> > So ?
>> >> > Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, you said it yourself "UQAM is a teaching university"
>> >>
>> >
>> > And ?
>> > Does that imply that UQAM has no teaching "equipment" ?
>> > You are assuming again in your desperate need..
>> >
>>
>> It says what it says. Again, you are trying to use your falacious
> tactic
>> of clouding the issue so you don't have to admit you are wrong. Face
> it,
>> UCI is a better university than UQAM, they have better teachers,
> higher
>> standards, better equipment, and the capacity to produce Nobel prize
>> winners which ultimately benefits the students.
>>
>
> Feel free to prove what you claim....
> By the way..
> In an accounting class, what exactly would be the "better equipment" ?
> Ditto for a class in English composition.
> As you can see, the premise of "better equipement" is where the
> fallacious
> argument resides..
> Ditto for the other arguments.
> Too bad....
You obviously don't understand. For an english major or accounting
major, "better equipment" would be a better library. Without a doubt, I
can tell you that a UCI student has access to more library materials
than a student at UQAM could ever dream of. Try and think outside the
box.
>
>
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
>> >> > I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
>> >> > Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try
> to
>> > slam
>> >> > me..
>> >> >
>> >> You are lying agin. Just so not to get diverted from the central
>> >> argument by playing yet another of your he said she said games,
> look
>> > it
>> >> up in the archive.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Try to quote me..
>> > Youll be more credible..
>> > And do it in context,
>> > That is if you even know what that means...
>>
>> Here you go again. Quote yourself. It was a post you made to Orion.
> But
>> it was just a case of you putting your foot in your mouth again by
>> venturing into areas you know little about. Like I said before, you
> come
>> to a gunfight with a pointed stick and wonder why you get your ass
>> kicked so easily.
>>
>
> There you go again fantasizing about being a "gunfighter"..
> Too bad your powder is wet...
> Since you're the one making the accusations..
> It's for you to support them
> I don't have to prove anything about your accusations.
> On the other hand, since you cannot support your claims, that clearly
> demonstrates taht you really are full of shit..
> But hey, we've known that all along..
>
You have the post you made in your outbox/sent messages folder dumbfuck.
Look it up. Again you show your inability to think about anything other
than literal meanings. Let me spell the gunfighter thing out for you:
You try to argue a point without the proper resources. When you said
"the odds of an undergraduate having access to a Nobel prize winner is
like winning the lottery" you had not done your homework and were
soundly beaten in the argument by somebody that had. In other words, you
are showing up at a gunfight with a pointed stick. Is that clear or do I
have to dumb it down even more for you?
> People don't like me ?
> What people ?
Everybody I've seen reply to you on usenet that's for sure.
> People like you ?
> Glad to hear it..
> The very thought of being "liked" by something like you or your
> friends
> is offensive,
> I'd rather be told of being liked by a mosquito with malaria.
That's your loss.
>
> As to having you or those like you for a friend..
> With friends like you, who needs ennemies..
Again, it's your loss.
>
> As to all those people, you've never heard of..
> I'm willing to bet that all those anonymous posters are more
> likely just
> a few with multiple sigs..
> The sicko stalkers and harassers of usenet, like you, tend to do such
> things..
> Otherwise why hide who you are..
I'm willing to bet they are not. And they are certainly not annonymous.
You can contact most everybody in this group via email. I do not stalk,
and I do not harass. If somebody else does, that's not my problem, but
I'm not going to let them do it to me, so I use a "handle" My email is
valid, and the only time it wasn't was before I got a freemail account
so I could avoid spam.
>
> By the way, the above tactic of yours is a classic tactic of bullies
> when
> they try to undermine the self-confidence of their targets..
I was making a statement of fact, if you choose to ignore it, that's
your perogative, but it doesn't change the fact that nobody likes you.
> Too bad for the bullies like you, that I'm not prone to succumb to
> such
> claims.
> But hey..
> Keep trying..
> Your posts are a demonstration of a classic bully's tactics
>
Just because somebody constantly whips your ass in an argument doesn't
make them a bully.
Rev Turd Fredericks
>> These things are not taught in school, they are taught at home and
> via
>> experience. Thinking logically? Puleaseeee, give me one example of
>> that in grammar school.
>>
>
> Nice theory....
> Too bad that it doesn't jibe with the evidence..
>
> By the way, you figure out how many hours in the "experience" of a
> child is
> spent in school as opposed to at home..
> The average child gets up around 0700, and is in school by 0830.
> They come home aroung 1630, and go to bed aroung 2000.
> That puts about 8 hours in school versus less than 5 at home...
Last time I checked, a day had 24 hours. There is plenty of time for a
child to learn things from both his friends and his parents outside of
school. School is a place to warehouse children while their parents are
at work, during which time they are taught how to read, write and do
arithmatic and a few other things. Anybody that thinks otherwise has
some idealistic utopian dream that will never come true.
>
> Also, very sadly, in far too many homes, that parents:
> are NOT able to think logically,
Oh please! You are just showing your arrogance here. The human race has
evolved just fine without the help of the school system and parents that
think like androids.
> are NOT organized,
The parents are organized well enough to raise kids that end up just
fine. Not everybody will raise a child that becomes Colon Powell, but
that in no way invalidates the organizational ability of any parent.
> do NO plan, but instead life off the cuff
> do any real work,
> know how to stick with it...
> ANd the proff of that is evident in the low performance of students in
> more
> than half the schools of any country...
School performance has nothing to do with reality. It is an artificial
measure invented by educators to make themselves feel important. Yes,
it's a problem if "Johnny" can't read or write, but that's a failure of
the teachers not little Johnny's parents. Teachers get paid to teach
Johnny to read and write. If they can't do that, they shouldn't be
teaching.
>
> One example of thinking logically in elemntary (grammar - such a
> British
> term) school ?
> Well let's see...
> Simple artihmetic, is basic training for thinking logically
> Spelling, is also basic training in thinking logically..
> Sentence contruction is another..
Perhaps so, but if teachers did their jobs properly, kids would be able
to read and write etc. It's not up to teachers to teach logical
thinking, just lay down the basics and let it go from there. Kids learn
logic through interaction with others.
> Music lessons are another..
Music should be taught by parents, it has no place being taught in
primary school and should be an extra curricular activity in higher
levels.
>
> By the way, what about all thoses kids who spend their lives growing
> up in
> boarding schools, where seeing their families occurs during summer and
> holidays..
They still have friends they can learn from. That is what play is for
ie. teaching things like logical thinking.
Peter S. Saly
Sure I did..
Too bad that it was only in your fantasy..
Oh well
By the way, thank your for another Pavlovian reaction..
Nice theory....
Too bad that it doesn't jibe with the evidence..
By the way, you figure out how many hours in the "experience" of a child is
spent in school as opposed to at home..
The average child gets up around 0700, and is in school by 0830.
They come home aroung 1630, and go to bed aroung 2000.
That puts about 8 hours in school versus less than 5 at home...
Also, very sadly, in far too many homes, that parents:
are NOT able to think logically,
are NOT organized,
do NO plan, but instead life off the cuff
do any real work,
know how to stick with it...
ANd the proff of that is evident in the low performance of students in more
than half the schools of any country...
One example of thinking logically in elemntary (grammar - such a British
term) school ?
Well let's see...
Simple artihmetic, is basic training for thinking logically
Spelling, is also basic training in thinking logically..
Sentence contruction is another..
Music lessons are another..
By the way, what about all thoses kids who spend their lives growing up in
boarding schools, where seeing their families occurs during summer and
holidays..
Are you seeing that because they, for all intents and purpose have no
"family life" compared to the rest of the kids....
Where do they pickup all those things that you allege, they learn at "
taught at home and via experience."
> >Without any of these, you will never be anywhere near capable to go
trhough
> >any form of higher education
> >And by the way, I know a lot of people who did "research projects" LONG
> >before they hit university..
>
> Hint: silly sally, your key word is BEFORE! not after.
>
Hint dumbo...
LONG BEFORE....
I have friends who teach grade 4 and 5.
And guess what.
Their student's do "RESEARCH PROJECTS"..
SO where are those kids acquiring their "research skills" ?
IN grade school..
> >Maybe you should depend less on who likes you, and try supporting your
> >posits with better evidence..
> >
> Back up your statements with facts, not conjecture or allusions. (I
> never see any evidence from you, other than your stupidity)
>
Well such ignorant insults from an ignoramus are to be expected..
It's really easy for you to be educated..
Go back and finish your elementary education..
Well the fact that I feel no need to be "accountable" to an anonymous twit
like you, obviously bothers you..
It bothers me not at all..
So keep stewing in your juices..
At least it keeps you busy..
Peter S. Saly
Obviously it's not hard..
As a matter of fact it's so easy, who would want it ?
Only someone like you..
So sad..
>
> >
> >>
> >> > c) You made the remark about a university taking 4 years to
> > teach a
> >> > football player not to hurt himself.
> >> > Any school that needs 4 years to teach a football player
> > not
> >> > to hurt himself can't be that good..
> >>
> >> That was just a quick example dumbshit.
> >>
> >
> > So ?
> > This 'dumbshit" demonstrated that your quick example wasn't worth
> > that
> > much.
> > Must rile you some, to have a "dumbshit" demonstrate taht you're just
> > an
> > idiot..
> I guess my quick example wasn't worth that much, but only because you
> fail to understand it. I tried to make it simple for you. I know
> everybody else in this group "got it". Better get that neural tube of
> yours checked again, I think you need to get more of the rotten part cut
> out.
>
Naturallly
That fact that YOUR example was a dud, was not YOUR fault, but mine..
GROW UP..
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
So what ?
On a cloudy day, is the sky blue ?
At night is the sky blue ?
Only idiots, make such imprecise generalisations base on popular
assumptions..
A long time ago 10 people out of 10 believed that world was flat and that
the sun revolved around the earth..
They were proven to be wrong as knowledge increased.
That fact that you need to fall back on such an old canard as wether the sky
is blue or not, just goes to show what an idiot you are..
>
> >
> >
> >
> >> >>
> >> >> At UCI the students get taught not only by top notch
> > professionals,
> >> > they have top notch equipment as well.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Yeah you said that before..
> >> > So ?
> >> > Are you saying that that is not the case at UQAM ?
> >>
> >> Yes, you said it yourself "UQAM is a teaching university"
> >>
> >
> > And ?
> > Does that imply that UQAM has no teaching "equipment" ?
> > You are assuming again in your desperate need..
> >
>
> It says what it says. Again, you are trying to use your falacious tactic
> of clouding the issue so you don't have to admit you are wrong. Face it,
> UCI is a better university than UQAM, they have better teachers, higher
> standards, better equipment, and the capacity to produce Nobel prize
> winners which ultimately benefits the students.
>
Feel free to prove what you claim....
By the way..
In an accounting class, what exactly would be the "better equipment" ?
Ditto for a class in English composition.
As you can see, the premise of "better equipement" is where the fallacious
argument resides..
Ditto for the other arguments.
Too bad....
> >
> >> >
> >> > By the way, Why the hell are you so defensive about UCI..
> >> > I have NEVER come out and slammed it..
> >> > Or else you're just trying to use it as another excuse to try to
> > slam
> >> > me..
> >> >
> >> You are lying agin. Just so not to get diverted from the central
> >> argument by playing yet another of your he said she said games, look
> > it
> >> up in the archive.
> >>
> >
> > Try to quote me..
> > Youll be more credible..
> > And do it in context,
> > That is if you even know what that means...
>
> Here you go again. Quote yourself. It was a post you made to Orion. But
> it was just a case of you putting your foot in your mouth again by
> venturing into areas you know little about. Like I said before, you come
> to a gunfight with a pointed stick and wonder why you get your ass
> kicked so easily.
>
There you go again fantasizing about being a "gunfighter"..
Too bad your powder is wet...
Since you're the one making the accusations..
It's for you to support them
I don't have to prove anything about your accusations.
On the other hand, since you cannot support your claims, that clearly
demonstrates taht you really are full of shit..
But hey, we've known that all along..
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >> >
People don't like me ?
What people ?
People like you ?
Glad to hear it..
The very thought of being "liked" by something like you or your friends
is offensive,
I'd rather be told of being liked by a mosquito with malaria.
As to having you or those like you for a friend..
With friends like you, who needs ennemies..
As to all those people, you've never heard of..
I'm willing to bet that all those anonymous posters are more likely just
a few with multiple sigs..
The sicko stalkers and harassers of usenet, like you, tend to do such
things..
Otherwise why hide who you are..
By the way, the above tactic of yours is a classic tactic of bullies when
they try to undermine the self-confidence of their targets..
ramalane
"Peter S. Saly" <Pe...@Saly.com> wrote in message
news:tvouoms...@corp.supernews.com...
<snip>
: By the way, the above tactic of yours is a classic tactic of bullies when
: they try to undermine the self-confidence of their targets..
: Too bad for the bullies like you, that I'm not prone to succumb to
such
: claims.
: But hey..
: Keep trying..
: Your posts are a demonstration of a classic bully's tactics
Whereas my bully tactics are truly avant-garde, eh fuckwit?
/ramalane
--
------------------------------------------------------------
ATF BOMB THREAT CHECKLIST
Exact time of call________________________________________
Exact words of caller_____________________________________
__________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
QUESTIONS TO ASK
1. When is bomb going to explode?
2. Where is the bomb?
3. What does it look like?
4. What kind of bomb is it?
5. What will cause the bomb to explode?
6. Did you place the bomb?
7. Why?
8. Where are you calling from?
9. What is your address?
10. What is your name?
CALLER'S VOICE (Circle)
Calm Disguised Nasal Angry Broken
Stutter Slow Sincere Lisp Rapid
Giggling Deep Crying Squeaky Excited
Stressed Accent Loud Slurred Normal
If voice is familiar, whom did it sound like?_____________
_____________________________________________
Peter S. Saly
> Peter S. Saly wrote:
> >
> > "Iceman" <c0l...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >> These things are not taught in school, they are taught at home and
> > via
> >> experience. Thinking logically? Puleaseeee, give me one example of
> >> that in grammar school.
> >>
> >
> > Nice theory....
> > Too bad that it doesn't jibe with the evidence..
> >
> > By the way, you figure out how many hours in the "experience" of a
> > child is
> > spent in school as opposed to at home..
> > The average child gets up around 0700, and is in school by 0830.
> > They come home aroung 1630, and go to bed aroung 2000.
> > That puts about 8 hours in school versus less than 5 at home...
>
> Last time I checked, a day had 24 hours. There is plenty of time for a
> child to learn things from both his friends and his parents outside of
> school. School is a place to warehouse children while their parents are
> at work, during which time they are taught how to read, write and do
> arithmatic and a few other things. Anybody that thinks otherwise has
> some idealistic utopian dream that will never come true.
>
Obviously you are not only stupid but illiterate as well...
1) If you read what I wrote above, you will see that I used military time
which clearly recognizes a 24 hour day..
2a) I also factored in sleeping time.
Something that you so suddenly (and conveniently appear to have
missed)
Last time I checked, you were blabbering about the amount of sleep
needed by the average person..
Are you telling us that now this factoid is apparently suspended, to
satsfy your need to do another demonstration of your stupidity ?
2b) By the way, most kids need over 8 hours of sleep a day. Some can
require up to 12 hours,
3) I am really sad that for you, school was a warehouse..
This sad fact is readily apparent in your postings..
I must consider myself fortunate, that that was not my case.
4) Your last remark is a sad commentary, about this country
It is exactly your kind of ignorant attitude that is the reason why
the educational system is in disarray, and not providing quality education
for ALL residents of this country..
(And I know quite a few)
I am sure they will be more sad to see the blatehrings of another
ignoramus..
> >
> > Also, very sadly, in far too many homes, that parents:
> > are NOT able to think logically,
>
> Oh please! You are just showing your arrogance here. The human race has
> evolved just fine without the help of the school system and parents that
> think like androids.
>
Try again, stupid..
The human race really started forging ahead when education was made
available to more and more members of the human race..
But thank you once again for another clear demonstration that your school
experience was more warehousing than education..
To verify my statement, you should go talk, off the record, to teachers of
inner city poorer neighborhood schools..
The ability of a child to learn is directly proportional to the quality of
home life..
Where parent's do NOT value an education, the children do not value it
either.
And that is a primary condition for scholastic failure..
By the way, being called arrogant by the ignorant is no insult..
> > are NOT organized,
>
> The parents are organized well enough to raise kids that end up just
> fine. Not everybody will raise a child that becomes Colon Powell, but
> that in no way invalidates the organizational ability of any parent.
>
Never heard of "Colon Powell"(sic)
Was he a doctor ?
Maybe he was the guy who invented the colonic ?
By the way, what about the parent's who are so well organized that their
kids end up in jail before they even become 18 ?
How well organized were they ?
What about the parent's of children who drop out before high school, yet
have been demonstrated (far too often) to be smart enough for university ?
Have well organized were they ?
You are so busy, trying to attakc me, that you are completely blinded to the
fact that you are writing like an imbecile..
Actuallly, that is not much of a change from the rest of your posts..
Now is it ?
>
> > do NO plan, but instead life off the cuff
> > do any real work,
> > know how to stick with it...
> > ANd the proff of that is evident in the low performance of students in
> > more
> > than half the schools of any country...
>
> School performance has nothing to do with reality. It is an artificial
> measure invented by educators to make themselves feel important. Yes,
> it's a problem if "Johnny" can't read or write, but that's a failure of
> the teachers not little Johnny's parents. Teachers get paid to teach
> Johnny to read and write. If they can't do that, they shouldn't be
> teaching.
>
Really ?
Oh let me savour this latest one of your idiocies..
"School performance has nothing to do with reality"
So now we may conclude that ALL the blather about the "performance of UCI",
has noithing to do with reality..
Oh but this is so rich...
But this is no surprise, coming from an idiot who confuses "teachers"
with "child-warehouse managers"
So the fact that Johnny doens't ever crack a book at home has nothing to do
with a lack of reading and writing skills ?
Try again dummy..
Reading and writing are acquired skills, just like thinking..
And sitting in an overcrowded class will not teach it to you do any of
that by osmosis
It is learned by practice..
And you are quite right that to many idiots like you are confused with the
idea that
> >
> > One example of thinking logically in elemntary (grammar - such a
> > British term) school ?
> > Well let's see...
> > Simple artihmetic, is basic training for thinking logically
> > Spelling, is also basic training in thinking logically..
> > Sentence contruction is another..
>
> Perhaps so, but if teachers did their jobs properly, kids would be able
> to read and write etc. It's not up to teachers to teach logical
> thinking, just lay down the basics and let it go from there. Kids learn
> logic through interaction with others.
>
Ah yes the old,
"Kids learn logic through interaction with others"
Like what the kids learn in gangs. Right ?
Never heard of the expression
"You can lead a horse to water..
But you can't make it drink.."
Have you ?
The same is true of an education..
Education is NOT acquired through osmosis
Logical thinking is also NOT acquired through osmosis..
(Just look at you for an example of that truism)
I can lay out the basics of reading, writing, arirhtmetic and any other
subject you can name.
But if the student just sits there and does nothing with it.
Then they will NOT learn...
And anyone who believes otherwise is an ignorant mutt
Now since you have declared earlier that schools are nothing but
warehouses..
You are obvioulsy a believer of education by osmosis..
> > Music lessons are another..
>
> Music should be taught by parents, it has no place being taught in
> primary school and should be an extra curricular activity in higher
> levels.
>
Oh really ?
What if the parent's have absolutely no musical skills ?
Does that make them the right teachers for the job ?
(I am amazed at the amount of stupidities you are willing to
write..)
By the way, music is another of those skills, like learning foreign
languages, that have been demonstrated best learned before the age of 10..
And do you know why ?
Because the human brain is most receptive to learning new languages
(including the language of music and mathematics) before the age of 10,
after which the ability diminishes with near exponential speed..
Too bad that once again research demonstrates that you are just an ignorant
mutt..
But feel free to do some research on the subject.
That is if you don't presume acquiring such knowledge by osmosis..
> >
> > By the way, what about all thoses kids who spend their lives growing
> > up in
> > boarding schools, where seeing their families occurs during summer and
> > holidays..
>
> They still have friends they can learn from. That is what play is for
> ie. teaching things like logical thinking.
>
Playing nintendo doesn't teach you logical thinking..
Playing, let's sniff glue or paint, doens't teach you logical thinking..
Obviously, this was the kind of laissez-faire education you had..
Cause you sure haven't learned logical thinking either..
You are truly an ignorant mutt..
But hey, any moron who claims. that logical thinking can be picked up by
osmosis cant' be that stupid..
Riiiight ?
Peter S. Saly
The only area where you deserve "reverence" is in the depth of your
ignorance
I think it's sad that you need to buy yourself the title "reverend" to prop
up your ego..
But hey, whatever makes you feel good about yourself is a small drop in
a VERY, VERY LARGE and EMPTY bucket..
Oh I got the stupidity of your example and shredded it without a second
thought..
But remeember, you are the idiot who declares elsewhere:
"School performance has nothing to do with reality."
All, while in a thread where he is claiming that UCI is a better school than
another because it has a resident Nobel Prize winner..
Your name suits you so well
You think like a turd..
The central argument was that supposedly UCI is a better school that another
because it has a Nobel prie winner and possibly more equipement..
This from the same idiot who declared elsewhere:
"School performance has nothing to do with reality"...
Too bad that you are reduced to insults like "silly boy"..
So does that soothe your so small and so badly bruised ego ?
Oh please !
How stupid can you get..
Exactly what kind of "library material" do you need for an English
major ?
And who are you to declare that UCI has a better library than the UQAM
libraries ?
Are you presuming once again ?
That seems to be something you do rather often..
Too bad that you are unable to think within or without the box..
And you're too blinded by your arrant ignorance, to even realize that
you are so badly boxed in that you dont even know where the box is...
But feel free to presume as much as you want..
It won't make you right..
After all, you did give us the seminal answer to this discussion
"School performance has nothing to do with reality"..
So, get back to us when you return to reality...
Case you're nowhere near reality in your recent posts...
Once again..
It is YOUR claim that I said so..
Since you are unable to substantiate it..
The lying dumbfuck is YOU..
I have no need to disprove your claims that you are UNABLE to support with
EVIDENCE..
As to the Nobel Prize winner teaching undergraduates, you had to retract
yourself on that one..
Don't you remember ?
You ended up declaring he taught a graduate class.
Son I guess my statistical claim still stands.
As for the stick.
You have been firing so many blanks..
That I don't even need a stick to beat up on you..
I just have to use your very own words..
Too bad that you live so far from reality, that you are too stupid to
realize it..
But hey, your the turd-for-brains who wrote..
"School performance has nothing to do with reality"..
So in that context, Your NObel Prize winner's effect on undergrads is also
part of your "fantasy" having nothing to do with reality..
What can I say ?
Don't even need a stick at this "gunfght"
The moron "gunfighter" forgot to bring bullets or even a gun for
that matter..
All you are able to do is swagger around as if you're wearing a gunbelt and
point your finger and say bang-bang !
I didn't realize I was dealing with the moron of alt.2600....
No loss at all in my book..
I'm not the idiot "gunfighter" running around going bang-bang whit my
finger..
You are..
> >
> > As to having you or those like you for a friend..
> > With friends like you, who needs ennemies..
>
> Again, it's your loss.
>
That's not a loss, dummy..
Get a clue...
> >
> > As to all those people, you've never heard of..
> > I'm willing to bet that all those anonymous posters are more
> > likely just
> > a few with multiple sigs..
> > The sicko stalkers and harassers of usenet, like you, tend to do such
> > things..
> > Otherwise why hide who you are..
>
> I'm willing to bet they are not. And they are certainly not annonymous.
> You can contact most everybody in this group via email. I do not stalk,
> and I do not harass. If somebody else does, that's not my problem, but
> I'm not going to let them do it to me, so I use a "handle" My email is
> valid, and the only time it wasn't was before I got a freemail account
> so I could avoid spam.
>
Well I know for a fact that "nemesis" has already used about 4 different
sigs.
>
> >
> > By the way, the above tactic of yours is a classic tactic of bullies
> > when
> > they try to undermine the self-confidence of their targets..
>
> I was making a statement of fact, if you choose to ignore it, that's
> your perogative, but it doesn't change the fact that nobody likes you.
>
Sure you were..
Too bad that you are completely clueless about my private life to make
any such statement..
But then, you do like pissing in your own hat, mr "gunfighter"..
By the way, as long as ignorant nobodies like you don't like me..
I will be more than happy to accept that fate..
Too bad, nobody..
>
> > Too bad for the bullies like you, that I'm not prone to succumb to
> > such
> > claims.
> > But hey..
> > Keep trying..
> > Your posts are a demonstration of a classic bully's tactics
> >
>
> Just because somebody constantly whips your ass in an argument doesn't
> make them a bully.
>
Yah..
This alleged whipping from a moron who delcares:
"School performance has nothing to do with reality",
while trying to prove that one school is better than another..
Shit bubba, even a wet-noodle whipping by Ann Landers, would be more
dangerous and painfull that what you've been dishing out..