watch it dave.
mike
369> as are "incredible" and "incredulous". tholen?? you're saying that
369> Peter's Claim doesn't "believe" something ("incredulous")? or that his
369> claim is "unbelievable" ("incredible")? it can't be both unless you're
a
369> mystic.
dave, when a guy like you, pretending to be perfect, makes an error in
logic like this, it's very disappointing to us.
you really didn't know the meaning of the two words. it doesn't matter, but
why did you feel you had to use "incredulous"? because it sounded "heavy"?
i think i will e-mail this little error of yours to the general faculty and
administration of UH and ask for their opinion. i know that most of the
kids wouldn't care, so maybe your usage, and the general sense of
reference, has changed since i was on faculty.
like, can we now say, "hello from you!"?
tho...@antispam.ham
370> dave, when a guy like you, pretending to be perfect, makes an error in
370> logic like this, it's very disappointing to us.
Irrelevant, given that I'm not pretending to be perfect. What error in
logic did I allegedly make?
370> you really didn't know the meaning of the two words.
Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
370> it doesn't matter,
So why are you commenting on it?
370> but why did you feel you had to use "incredulous"?
It's the right word.
370> because it sounded "heavy"?
Guess again.
370> i think i will e-mail this little error of yours to the general faculty and
370> administration of UH and ask for their opinion.
What you think is irrelevant.
370> i know that most of the kids wouldn't care,
Since when are the "general faculty and administration" "kids"?
370> so maybe your usage, and the general sense of
370> reference, has changed since i was on faculty.
Evidence that you were on the faculty, please. Were you a "kid" at
the time?
370> like, can we now say, "hello from you!"?
To discuss classical music, please press 1.
To discuss composers of classical music, please press 2.
To discuss performers of classical music, please press 3.
To be an antagonist, please hold, and your antagonism will
be dealt with in the order received by the first available
representative.
mike
news:2JwJ8.25071$R53.10...@twister.socal.rr.com:
ok, dave. you're going to be realllly famous in a couple of weeks.
Daniel Seriff
(in message <2JwJ8.25071$R53.10...@twister.socal.rr.com>):
> And another orangie digest, designed to reduce the clutter in the newsgroup:
>
> 370> dave, when a guy like you, pretending to be perfect, makes an error in
> 370> logic like this, it's very disappointing to us.
>
> Irrelevant, given that I'm not pretending to be perfect.
Classic pontification.
> 370> but why did you feel you had to use "incredulous"?
>
> It's the right word.
Classic pontification.
--
Daniel Seriff
Bears are crazy. They'll bite your head if you're wearing steak on it.
- SG
mike
news:01HW.B91C50400...@news-server.austin.rr.com:
> On Thu, 30 May 2002 16:21:02 -0500, tho...@AntiSpam.ham wrote
> (in message <2JwJ8.25071$R53.10...@twister.socal.rr.com>):
>
>> And another orangie digest, designed to reduce the clutter in the
>> newsgroup:
>>
>> 370> dave, when a guy like you, pretending to be perfect, makes an
>> error in 370> logic like this, it's very disappointing to us.
>>
>> Irrelevant, given that I'm not pretending to be perfect.
>
> Classic pontification.
>
>> 370> but why did you feel you had to use "incredulous"?
>>
>> It's the right word.
>
> Classic pontification.
>
good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what pocket
dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
Oisk17
>good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what pocket
>dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
>
The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the level of
discourse. Tholen is a colon? How about Mike is a tyke ? What next, Mike,
"Paul is a scrawl?"
Mike has told us that he is:
A writer
A past member of the U of H faculty
A composer
One whose works are on display in the Frick. (this was in a private post, to be
fair)
I would like to read his work, listen to his work, or view his work, but he has
always failed to respond to my requests to do so. One might think that all of
his accomplishments, to use one of Mike's favorite terms, are "fictive." I do
NOT think that; I am genuinely curious about his work. However, one could
certainly be suspicious of someone who cites his accomplishments without
providing any evidence of them. If Mike has done so in the past, and I have
missed it, then I humbly apologize to him.
Despite the many opinions that he used the word incorrectly, Dave remains
incredulous. Dave, the word is normally used to describe a person, not a
statement. My dictionary does list "Incredible" as an alternate meaning, (that
is the way Dave used it) but also says that that usage is obsolete.
Regards,
Paul
mike
news:20020531005152...@mb-fn.aol.com:
>>From: mike
>
>>good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what
>>pocket dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
>>
>
> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the level
> of discourse. Tholen is a colon? How about Mike is a tyke ? What
> next, Mike, "Paul is a scrawl?"
>
> Mike has told us that he is:
> A writer
> A past member of the U of H faculty
> A composer
> One whose works are on display in the Frick. (this was in a private
> post, to be fair)
my photos aren't at the Frick... that was your misunderstanding. they're in
another NY museum. one with modern stuff.
>
> I would like to read his work, listen to his work, or view his work,
> but he has always failed to respond to my requests to do so.
i've posted the link enough.
> One might
> think that all of his accomplishments, to use one of Mike's favorite
> terms, are "fictive." I do NOT think that;
so what! i'm tired of being judged by people who aren't creative!
> I am genuinely curious
> about his work.
why would that be significant? you probably like everything, except for
what you don't like! =)
> However, one could certainly be suspicious of someone
> who cites his accomplishments without providing any evidence of them.
> If Mike has done so in the past, and I have missed it, then I humbly
> apologize to him.
don't even. just create something decent to throw in my face. make me
astonished.
>
> Despite the many opinions that he used the word incorrectly, Dave
> remains incredulous.
it wasn't that dave was "incredulous" but that he designated peter's idea
as incredulous: he assigned some kind of judgement ability to an
abstraction. the mistake is funny. dave isn't funny.
> Dave, the word is normally used to describe a
> person, not a statement. My dictionary does list "Incredible" as an
> alternate meaning, (that is the way Dave used it) but also says that
> that usage is obsolete.
actually, what dictionary are you using? i didn't see that one in the OED.
is this Websters?
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul
>
tho...@antispam.ham
> mike wrote:
>> good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what pocket
>> dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the level of
> discourse.
Why do you say he's usually erudite?
> Tholen is a colon? How about Mike is a tyke ? What next, Mike,
> "Paul is a scrawl?"
>
> Mike has told us that he is:
> A writer
> A past member of the U of H faculty
> A composer
> One whose works are on display in the Frick. (this was in a private post, to be
> fair)
>
> I would like to read his work, listen to his work, or view his work, but he has
> always failed to respond to my requests to do so. One might think that all of
> his accomplishments, to use one of Mike's favorite terms, are "fictive." I do
> NOT think that; I am genuinely curious about his work. However, one could
> certainly be suspicious of someone who cites his accomplishments without
> providing any evidence of them. If Mike has done so in the past, and I have
> missed it, then I humbly apologize to him.
>
> Despite the many opinions that he used the word incorrectly, Dave remains
> incredulous. Dave, the word is normally used to describe a person, not a
> statement.
And how is that relevant?
> My dictionary does list "Incredible" as an alternate meaning, (that
> is the way Dave used it) but also says that that usage is obsolete.
Does that make it wrong?
mike
news:yNHJ8.26737$R53.11...@twister.socal.rr.com:
well, paul... your pet poodle bit you -- but, we knew he would. you
yourself told me that tholen irrelevent. in fact, tholen is a colon.
Coby Beck
mike <orang...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:Xns921F3BD8E4014...@66.75.162.198...
ROTFL!!
just a matter of time before the poodle shits all over his carpet, too.
--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")
tho...@antispam.ham
> orang...@aol.com wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Oisk17 writes:
>>>> Despite the many opinions that he used the word incorrectly, Dave
>>>> remains incredulous. Dave, the word is normally used to describe a
>>>> person, not a statement.
>>> And how is that relevant?
>>>> My dictionary does list "Incredible" as an alternate meaning, (that is
>>>> the way Dave used it) but also says that that usage is obsolete.
>>> Does that make it wrong?
>> well, paul... your pet poodle bit you -- but, we knew he would. you
>> yourself told me that tholen irrelevent. in fact, tholen is a colon.
> ROTFL!!
What's allegedly so funny, Beck?
> just a matter of time before the poodle shits all over his carpet, too.
What alleged pet poodle, Beck?
mike
Peter T. Daniels
>
> >From: mike
>
> >good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what pocket
> >dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
> >
>
> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the level of
> discourse. Tholen is a colon? How about Mike is a tyke ? What next, Mike,
> "Paul is a scrawl?"
>
> Mike has told us that he is:
> A writer
> A past member of the U of H faculty
> A composer
> One whose works are on display in the Frick. (this was in a private post, to be
> fair)
That doesn't seem possible, since the bequest that created the museum
stipulates that the collection can't be altered by addition or
subtraction -- they couldn't even lend their Vermeer(s) to the Met's big
show last year, practically across the street (but the Met suggested
that the visitors go there too to check it/them out).
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net
Daniel Seriff
(in message <yNHJ8.26737$R53.11...@twister.socal.rr.com>):
> Oisk17 writes:
>> mike wrote:
>>> good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what pocket
>>> dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
>
>> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the level of
>> discourse.
>
> Why do you say he's usually erudite?
Mike is nothing if not erudite. Paul is just jealous of his ability for
abstract impressionism, or so it always strikes me.
--
Daniel Seriff
Torah! Torah! Torah!
- War cry of the kamikaze Rabbis
mike
news:3CF81D...@worldnet.att.net:
that's right, peter. there's no place for them to be hung in the Frix.
i've only been there once, and it was one of the most depressing places
i've ever been in. it wasn't the tons o'stuff... i like the V&A... it was
that the junk was held in such high value. i can't even begin to explain
what bothered me about the place. even a hypertrophied place like the
Whitney is a waterpark for art compared to the fritz.
thank you for correcting paul, though. i explained in a follow up that
he'd been mistaken about where my stuff was... he'd guessed the *rick on
his own.
[flattering to Paul, so i'll quote him without permission]
Paul:
> You did once mention that your work was on display somewhere, was it
The Frick?
> You did not say what kind of work it was. I guessed that it might be
> professional photography. I have won some minor awards (Long Island
>"slide of the year,") but great photographers don't take pictures, they
> make pictures.
cool dude.
ah, i just found the e-mail i sent him!
mike:
> man, you really don't get it. i don't need to have pictures on the wall
because i'm a producing visual artist and need the clarity of no-image,
because i'm forming images from the world around me. it's very difficult
to describe to someone who hasn't the experience. my work's in the
wagstaff and the getty collections.
>
i'll let you guess what a "wagstaff" is. my NY stuff's in a place with
other modern stuff -- this can be a living room (actually in some) or a
mausolinoleum like the ....
anyway, can i go kill myself now? i hate what happens to stuff in this
country. i had some stuff in a private gallery in france, but the kids
died of AIDS, and i think my pix ended up in either some bistro or the
Bib.Nat. (where all good junk goes when it goes to france).
mike
> On Fri, 31 May 2002 4:56:46 -0500, tho...@AntiSpam.ham wrote
> (in message <yNHJ8.26737$R53.11...@twister.socal.rr.com>):
>
>> Oisk17 writes:
>>> mike wrote:
>>>> good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what
>>>> pocket dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
>>
>>> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the
>>> level of discourse.
>>
>> Why do you say he's usually erudite?
>
> Mike is nothing if not erudite. Paul is just jealous of his ability for
> abstract impressionism, or so it always strikes me.
>
sploof! my face is actually turning red. i'm really just a big erotic ham.
i don't think paul always catches my topos, and i think i confuse him more
than i inspire him. i think he's kinda beyond jealousy too.
but, tholen the colon seems to turning a little green! wouldn't it be neat
if tolon the colon just started saying things about music without caring
whether anyone agrees with him? the harringtons seem capable of this.
Daniel Seriff
(in message <Xns921FAA377A104...@66.75.162.198>):
>>>> The usually erudite Orangie manages against all odds to lower the
>>>> level of discourse.
>>>
>>> Why do you say he's usually erudite?
>>
>> Mike is nothing if not erudite. Paul is just jealous of his ability for
>> abstract impressionism, or so it always strikes me.
>
> sploof! my face is actually turning red. i'm really just a big erotic ham.
Speaking of which, I think I'll finish off that ham I've got as a midnight
snack.
> i don't think paul always catches my topos, and i think i confuse him more
> than i inspire him. i think he's kinda beyond jealousy too.
I think the fact that he doesn't understand you pisses him off, and that
makes him jealous of those of us who do (or think we do).
> but, tholen the colon seems to turning a little green! wouldn't it be neat
> if tolon the colon just started saying things about music without caring
> whether anyone agrees with him?
Does Himself care whether anyone agrees with him now? I hadn't noticed.
> the harringtons seem capable of this.
I've noticed.
Oisk17
>my photos aren't at the Frick... that was your misunderstanding. they're in
>another NY museum. one with modern stuff.
Thank you. Could you tell me (privately if you wish) where I can see them?
>
>i've posted the link enough.
>
OK. Then I apologize, as I said I would. Could you post it again? Privately,
if you wish? Or could someone else who knows the link send it to me?
>
>so what! i'm tired of being judged by people who aren't creative!
>
And of course, you know that I am not creative. Since I post under my real
name, (Paul Cohen) you can easily look up my published works. Creativity takes
many forms, Mike. I assume that you are every bit as creative as you say you
are, which is why I would like to sample your work.
> I am genuinely curious
>> about his work.
>
>why would that be significant? you probably like everything, except for
>what you don't like! =)
Ah, foolish of me to think that an artist would want others to sample his
output...
>
>> Despite the many opinions that he used the word incorrectly, Dave
>> remains incredulous.
>
>it wasn't that dave was "incredulous" but that he designated peter's idea
>as incredulous: he assigned some kind of judgement ability to an
>abstraction. the mistake is funny.
You missed my meaning. Dave was incredulous, that is, he did not believe the
facts presented to him. I said that just to illustrate the correct use of the
term.
>actually, what dictionary are you using? i didn't see that one in the OED.
>is this Websters?
>
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Ninth Edition.
Oisk17
>Date: 05/31/2002 11:53 A
>
>well, paul... your pet poodle bit you -- but, we knew he would. you
>yourself told me that tholen irrelevent. in fact, tholen is a colon.
>
My pet poodle? I did not defend Dave. I simply suggested that you are too
talented to sink to name calling.
Mike is a tyke.
Paul
Oisk17
>tholen is a colon.
>
Mike is a tyke
Oisk17
>
>Mike is nothing if not erudite. Paul is just jealous of his ability for
>abstract impressionism, or so it always strikes me.
>
>--
>Daniel Seriff
But I called him erudite! What leads you to your "jealous of his ability..."
conclusion? I was simply pointing out that none of that ability is demonstrated
by his "Tholen is a colon" remarks. I am jealous of his musical talent and
knowledge, as I am about most of the people here, you included.
Regards,
Paul
Oisk17
>
>i don't think paul always catches my topos, and i think i confuse him more
>than i inspire him. i think he's kinda beyond jealousy too.
Thanks, I think! You do confuse me, and I will even grant that this is as much
the fault of my inability to go beyond the literal, as it is yours for
occasionally sacrificing clarity for style.
Regards,
Paul
Oisk17
>I think the fact that he doesn't understand you pisses him off, and that
>makes him jealous of those of us who do (or think we do).
Respectfully, Daniel, this is nonsense. What pissed me off (and it was quite a
while ago) was my perception that Mike would respond to on-topic questions with
unresponsive posts that seemed intended only to show the enormous depth of his
intellect. At the time, he seemed to me an intellectual puddle, an opinion I
know longer have.
Paul
Oisk17
>
>thank you for correcting paul, though. i explained in a follow up that
>he'd been mistaken about where my stuff was... he'd guessed the *rick on
>his own.
Yeah. It was the Getty. Apologies for my memory lapse.
>Paul:
>> You did once mention that your work was on display somewhere, was it
>The Frick?
>> You did not say what kind of work it was. I guessed that it might be
>> professional photography. I have won some minor awards (Long Island
>>"slide of the year,") but great
photographers don't take pictures, they
>> make pictures.
Hm.. Rereading that, I see that the meaning of my last sentence was unclear. I
meant "great photographers" as opposed to amateurs like me! (I think that was
clear in our exchange of emails, Mike)
>anyway, can i go kill myself now?
No, I would miss you. Really!
Regards,
Paul
tho...@antispam.ham
> Dave was incredulous, that is, he did not believe the
> facts presented to him.
Very good, Paul.
tho...@antispam.ham
> I did not defend Dave. I simply suggested that you are too
> talented to sink to name calling.
On what do you base your evaluation of his talent?
tho...@antispam.ham
> I was simply pointing out that none of that ability is demonstrated
> by his "Tholen is a colon" remarks.
His ability to be an antagonist is demonstrated by his remark.
mike
news:20020601020450...@mb-cj.aol.com:
poodle? hold out your hand! =)
mike
@twister.socal.rr.com:
but, dave's argument was that peter's argument was incredulous. this may be
an obsolete turn of phrase, as you suggest. why is tholen writing like
Fanny Burney? is he religious? he is a colon, this tholen. not even a semi-
colon, but the drain of despair. perhaps this makes him religious. i know
he studied logic with jesuits.
tho...@antispam.ham
371> ok, dave. you're going to be realllly famous in a couple of weeks.
What's going to happen in a couple of weeks?
372> good point... that's the real way to use the cliché. i wonder what
372> pocket dictionary tholen is a colon is using?
373> it wasn't that dave was "incredulous" but that he designated peter's idea
373> as incredulous: he assigned some kind of judgement ability to an
373> abstraction. the mistake is funny. dave isn't funny.
373> actually, what dictionary are you using? i didn't see that one in the OED.
373> is this Websters?
374> well, paul... your pet poodle bit you -- but, we knew he would. you
374> yourself told me that tholen irrelevent. in fact, tholen is a colon.
375> tholen is a colon.
376> sploof! my face is actually turning red. i'm really just a big erotic ham.
376> i don't think paul always catches my topos, and i think i confuse him more
376> than i inspire him. i think he's kinda beyond jealousy too.
376> but, tholen the colon seems to turning a little green! wouldn't it be neat
376> if tolon the colon just started saying things about music without caring
376> whether anyone agrees with him? the harringtons seem capable of this.
377> i like this... and, in honor of the author of tholen's putated income
377> source (NASA dirivitives), i think the play must be "Waiting For Goddard".
378> poodle? hold out your hand! =)
To discuss classical music, please press 1.
To discuss composers of classical music, please press 2.
To discuss performers of classical music, please press 3.
To be an antagonist, please hold, and your antagonism will
be dealt with in the order received by the first available
representative.
mike
cj.aol.com:
or a bike. maybe an ace, but definetly rubberized at the waist.
mike
news:20020601015433...@mb-cj.aol.com:
oof, let's get back to music! i'm a euponious phony... everyone else is
real and interesting. including the colon who is tholen.
Oisk17
>oof, let's get back to music! i'm a euponious phony... everyone else is
>real and interesting. including the colon who is tholen.
You meant "euphonious," right? I am never quite sure which of your typos are
deliberate!
Regards,
Paul
mike
news:20020601231619...@mb-ca.aol.com:
oops, you're totally right with this one. what a dumb mistake to make in a
ng on "sound"! i think i'm not using the same language as other me use. =)
tho...@antispam.ham
357> what's the difference?
357> "space" is a waste of space... going to the moon, as though the moon were
357> anything more than a fantasy of moon for us. all the spent money which
357> could have been given to art and music programs for kids: imagine if tholen
357> had been taught to read?
357> what he does can't be very satisfying for him. why else would he bother
357> with a subject which he has no feel for? yeah, there isn't any semi-nobel
357> prize for semi-smart scientists. lucky us, but i'm not going to validate
357> his high school logic text notions of inference.
357> but, he gives credence to the notion that number-crunchers are ideationally
357> handicaped: he doesn't seem able to hear more than one music in his little
357> head at a time. i guess that's why he and harrington became such spiteful
357> little music dogs with each other: they recognize their own species.
mike
tho...@antispam.ham
358> i think he likes me.
What you think is irrelevant, orangie.
D.G. Porter
>
> And another orangie digest, designed to reduce the clutter in the newsgroup.
>
> 358> i think he likes me.
>
> What you think is irrelevant, orangie.
Question: Just who the fuck appointed you "relevancy judge"?
mike
news:3CFACB...@SENDMENOSPAMpacbell.naught:
it's just his way of saying that he likes me. he knows that what i know is
a direct apprehension of truth. he's been tagging on me since i taught him
rhetoric.
cognition of tholen as a colon is one of the great advances in western
science. we knew that the egg inverted inside out to make brain, but we
didn't know that some eggs invert again. to clarify, tholen is biologicall
a colon. but, mathematically, he's a quine bottle.
tho...@antispam.ham
Nobody needed to, Porter.
I see that you still haven't just let it go. Hypocrite.
Daniel Seriff
(in message <p4CK8.34243$R53.14...@twister.socal.rr.com>):
> D.G. Porter writes:
>
>>> And another orangie digest, designed to reduce the clutter in the
>>> newsgroup.
>>>
>>> 358> i think he likes me.
>>>
>>> What you think is irrelevant, orangie.
>
>> Question: Just who the fuck appointed you "relevancy judge"?
>
> Nobody needed to, Porter.
Classic pontification.
--
Daniel Seriff
Bears are crazy. They'll bite your head if you're wearing steak on it.
- SG
Oisk17
>
>cognition of tholen as a colon is one of the great advances in western
>science. we knew that the egg inverted inside out to make brain, but we
>didn't know that some eggs invert again. to clarify, tholen is biologicall
>a colon. but, mathematically, he's a quine bottle.
Pretty good, Mike! I like the quine bottle pun...and I think I get your
inverted egg reference...referring to differentiation after fertilization.
Never occurred to me before that in some cases, the specialized tissue might
revert to its original state, undergoing constant mitosis without producing
useful cells... The colon part doesn't fit the analogy though...
Paul
mike
news:20020604000930...@mb-fn.aol.com:
it's based on the concept that we're food tubes, but that the tube inverted
for us in utero, with inner cells becoming brain cells... wrapping us up
like burritos, or, in tholen is a colon, reinverting back to
outer/innertube: whatever braincells had had a chance to be developed in
T.I.A.C are now dealing with big mac or big tholen, depending on what
T.I.A.C eats for lunch: the quine bottle/kline bottle pun is about colon
feeding back into itself (Quine the logician; tholen, IAC, the critic of
our logic). =)
tho...@antispam.ham
> orangiemike wrote:
Doesn't fit the newsgroup either.
tho...@antispam.ham
359> it's just his way of saying that he likes me. he knows that what i know is
359> a direct apprehension of truth. he's been tagging on me since i taught him
359> rhetoric.
359> cognition of tholen as a colon is one of the great advances in western
359> science. we knew that the egg inverted inside out to make brain, but we
359> didn't know that some eggs invert again. to clarify, tholen is biologicall
359> a colon. but, mathematically, he's a quine bottle.
360> ah, this is like the savant who knows his beer but keeps pissing on the
360> rug!
361> verbosity! and wittyness! LaRochefoucauld, we heed thee.
361> The tholen musicalic,
361> Was learnt from Diderot:
361> "'Tis easy to know music:
361> Just pucker up and blow."
361> ....
362> it's based on the concept that we're food tubes, but that the tube inverted
362> for us in utero, with inner cells becoming brain cells... wrapping us up
362> like burritos, or, in tholen is a colon, reinverting back to
362> outer/innertube: whatever braincells had had a chance to be developed in
362> T.I.A.C are now dealing with big mac or big tholen, depending on what
362> T.I.A.C eats for lunch: the quine bottle/kline bottle pun is about colon
362> feeding back into itself (Quine the logician; tholen, IAC, the critic of
362> our logic). =)
363> for tholen the colon, yes. he could have posted an informative post with
363> some planatary platitudes -- tholen the colon is a public servant. he works
363> for the state and he ought to take a more even handed approach with the
363> public. in reality, the things he knows aren't as important to us at the
363> musical things we know. NASA is just another waste of money for some of us
363> -- i'd rather see all NASA money going for funding string quartets in
363> grammar schools.
363> tholon represents psudo-knowledge for us... his method, the scholastic
363> syllogism, is meant for theological argument. this method causes tholen the
363> colon to assume that we must be talking about his qualities.
363> tholon the colon is good for passing information on, but when he tries to
363> make anything of his offal, he becomes officious. well, actually, he starts
363> barking like one of those yapping dogs.
363> jj, you'll know the tholonic function when he attacks one of your
363> propositions. he can't help himself.
tho...@antispam.ham
364> if i did, i must have been in a trance. conscious, i would have used
364> "panting" more, cause i like verbal intrusions.
364> this is Levi the Levite, by the way? how'd HE get involved with a cosmetic
364> gargoyle like tholen D.C.?
364> he had to use the men's room?
365> as a kind of courtesy to you, i'm not on your case about the feebleness of
365> "tyke". tholen the colon, however, isn't even able to get out of bed. his
365> belches have to stand for all manner of things. this is the way of the
365> neanderthal, and we must respect the colon in tholen.
365> not at all. can you really tell me why it's more important to go to mars
365> than go to macdonalds? is there stuff there? are we looking for golden
365> cities again?
365> why? why is it worth bankrupting society just so that we can know an iota
365> more about what we already know. we know what life is. the martian life is
365> going to be identical to certain life forms on earth... the atmosphere's
365> obviously commingled at some point. i am curious why the water dropped from
365> the planetoids didn't surface form an cycle cloud of gases about the
365> surface. it may just be that mars got creamed more than earth did, and that
365> we inherated all its gasses. i like the idea of seeing stuff in outer
365> space. they raise lots of questions. but, i like the idea of redesigning
365> ourselves biologically. that's a decent spending of resources. i'd like
365> bigger ears, for instance.
365> what business is this of yours? are you religious? will god strike the
365> newsgroup down for my doo-dosity? (i'd say "doo-dacity" but, you know, it
365> just sounds too pretentious).
365> he's not attacking, though. You know that. "A superior mind cannot but help
365> reform inferiorities into acceptable superiorities"*.
365> do you think he can make my ears bigger?
365> * tholen d.c. date pickup line from his arizona days. the rest of it goes,
365> "let me work on your ...".
366> more recent than that.
366> what will you do when you find one? get under it?
367> in all fairness to tholen d. colon, i think he was just circling -- don't
367> these ferals poke to see if the prey is alive? -- is this a nutritional or
367> a safety concern? i don't know.
367> but, wasn't it interesting that JJ pointed at Harrington as someone else
367> who was antagonistic to him? and wasn't it harrington's post which first
367> whipped t.d.c. into a frenzy?
367> we're lucky to have been here at the creation... but, at what cost? how
367> many marginals were driven in fear of us to their plonk plunger... running
367> in confusion at our attempts to name the essence of tholon and huntington,
367> astral twins? we have been tainted by the twin-backed beast we hunt.
368> yes, peter pointed this out awhile ago here. and i wondered outloud if his
368> encouragement of astronomers meant that tholen, d.c. could sell autographed
368> hardhats for the big event.
368> i believe i pointed out that some earth science people think that the
368> entire gulf of mexico is an impact crater. i don't remember tholen, d.c.
368> popping up on this tidbit, so i suppose it's an acceptable thing to say.
368> what, we're gonna need just-in-time delivery of hard-hats from china? this
368> is good advice.
369> jj, what did you do before you became interested in music criticism as a
369> career?
370> naw, "tyke" is to obvious to work. and, like, "mike the tyke" is
370> complementary. what you need to do is build the group's consciousness:
370> "mike is a dyke". like, that would work.
370> well, i used to get used as the basketball in the 7th grade, i was so
370> lightweight... in fact, some kid said i was "too skinny to live". but,
370> remember, i don't teach kids anymore, so don't care anymore what the little
370> bastards do for recreation.
370> well, i'm not sure what's in your head, and i think that would be a way
370> more interesting place to visit than mars. also, i haven't been to
370> Budapest.
370> as a rebuffing to you, i'll wonder out loud if you've ever thought or read
370> about geology. like, where did the water on earth come from? little comets,
370> one by one? where did the comets come from? Aquarius??
370> look, tholen isn't in any position to talk about celestial history, beyond
370> computing putative orbits fore and aft. this is real geologic history, not
370> the cosmos theory of the month that these guys give off. an astronomer
370> isn't necessarily a physicist, and a physicist isn't necessarily a
370> geologist.
370> well, i spell phonetically probably most like, but that's because i'm
370> coming in hear this foroom from writing music. momentarily, words sound
370> different to me than they do to you. besides, i don't know what you're
370> talking about. i spell most correctly, being a sixteenth century
370> theologian.
370> it was a joke! i didn't use it cause it sounds like something a science
370> teacher would use on fellow faculty in the lunchroom. like, mystery
370> history-loaf for lunch.
371> no! Please! no fukking binaries! they're evil! some guys have 7 kbs modems
371> they get locked up for days with these long threads as it is...
tho...@antispam.ham
372> thanks, peter. although i think the counter is something about the beauty
372> of thermodynamics. an understanding that "truth", even "scientific truth",
372> is an aesthetic experience might help turn their minds away from star trek
372> desire.
373> well, this is going to fuk with your head, but the suggestion is that some
373> water-event related space rock came from the direction of what came to be
373> called, as a consequence, "the water bearer".
373> oh, right! and proto moon didn't drift over from some hydrogen-rich
373> neigbor?
373> this is pseudo-science. last month there wasn't even supposed to be any
373> water on mars.
Balderdash.
373> well, that's it, isn't it? i mean, he's a public employee being paid to
373> read our newsgroup? he's gonna be a poster boy for welfare-scientists soon
373> enough.
373> yah, i should shave more. but, my scaryness should be that i make you
373> rethink, not, like most people here, that i demand you think certain
373> comforting things.
373> not of me, i guess. pass me the hemlock.
374> "natural selection" is pseudo-science... it's a lamer-queen's explanation
374> for diversity; substitution of a mechanism of swishing "nature" for puritan
374> "god".
374> tholonic colonitude, i don't even like the 42nd, but i'd still dance it on
374> 42nd street, before i'd acolyte for your priestiness. people like you
374> shouldn't be allowed opinions on more than beer -- you ought to monitor the
374> telescope and leave the thinking to your betters (though i doubt Huxley Was
374> your better).
374> in fact, you should go out and mow the hay.
374> (by the way, did you play the local 42nd Street? the musical was crap, but
374> the pit orchestra was very fine.)
Read the program.
375> very funny.
376> paul, i can see that you've actually read about the foundations of evolution.
376> which bible did you use? there is mendelian mutation, but no proof of "natural
376> selection".
376> it's crappy of you to use the "anti-intellectual" tag, by the way. it's like a
376> churchman saying that someone is a "cynic", except, of course, that you feel you
376> are in possession of the truth, and that the churchman would be a "dogmatic
376> neanderthal".
376> dumbolius lector, it is because i just made it up... it suggests ritual
376> determination, and i thought it fit quite well.
376> why? you flunk high school lit class? you got the choice of just saying no. i
376> don't get hit points for people looking at my posts. anyway, you have to
376> understand that my impression of you is that you are emotionally a 14 year old,
376> with a good-ish spirit, by very je-fukking-june and doing well in your religious
376> classes... so much so, that you don't like beatniks Hanging Out In The
376> Schoolyard 'cause they're low-class, and you won't get accepted to MIT if they
376> know you was hanging around beatniks. lucky for you, beatniks ain't into little
376> embryos, so i'm not going to smooch you up and tell you how smart you are so's i
376> can hit you up for dope money -- yah, we're gonna smoke pod and listen to bird
376> for breakfast, but no little kids is invited! then we're gonna do some heavy
376> Haydn, and peter's gotta impersonate the mozart fourtieth. -- and you can just
376> sit home, doing your school work, and dream about kissing marlyn monroe some
376> day, all because you don't like the way i spel.
377> well, there you have it! -- way better than the angry red planet, and food
377> too! plus!!! Bartok Bela!!!
378> apparently the g.g. has mass and electrical charge, and the two charges
378> react against each other. the h-r neighbor could be venus or any other
378> child of jupiter.
378> paper a few days ago announced a ton'o'wat. lots of it below the surface.
378> that was my point to paul. i don't expect science to predict. it's the
378> function of researchers to predict. and, when they do predict, they become
378> engineers.
378> for instance, here's an example of the problems of scientific prediction,
378> from today's paper:
378> "The jade hadnt been found before for several reasons. Geological teachings
378> said it was unlikely jade would be in such a place... [] The discovery
378> could spur new research in history and geology."
378> and why might that be? because you wish it? are you a magi?
378> ok, it's in the mail, don't remind me.
378> geez! that's wonderful!! i am full of awe. i don't know about the midi, but
378> i've sure thought about it.
378> you think i'm not a deist! you think i'm a fukking pig-head atheist! that's
378> worse than being called a unitarian! kaa-faw, sir! all good americans are
378> diest! i'm hoit!
378> proof of diestic declination to the eliptic??? i invent nature spirits with
378> my music! and i try to write a least one piece a month while being naked,
378> whether i need to or not. also, my birthday is my favorite holiday, cause
378> it's around the summer solstice... and, i'm panatomic X in dektol...
378> ancient heathen practice. plus i know the original location of Hades.
379> waah, haah, haa~
379> dave and i trade reader's digest and scientific american -- way out here in
379> hulaland. we both be erudite as hell.
380> "controlled disbursment"
tho...@antispam.ham
381> toad of life, even gould is going to be way over your head -- but, you will
381> learn from him about the problems with the concept "natural selection".
381> shouldn't you be reading about Glenn Gould though?
382> ("how to suddenly convince him that he's not up to date on this material?
382> he acts as though he knew some of the basic physics. i know, i'll include
382> "mass" with "electrical charge", and that way he'll extrapolate to scale"
382> "Images of Titan captured by the Keck Telescope in Hawaii within the last
382> year suggest the planet may be home to icy landforms and frigid hydrocarbon
382> seas, said Bruce Macintosh, an astrophysicist at the Department of Energy's
382> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who analyzed the images"
382> "sciencia" means "knowledge", you know... not "fortune telling". it's ok to
382> guess, but the guess should only be made to suggest other tests.
382> particularly in an age of specialization, it's no longer viable for the
382> scientist to be forced to be "soothsayer".
382> why? should any rooty-tooty artist be humble? we don't find truth, we
382> invent truth. my only problem is that people abuse their positions in the
382> bureaucracy. it's the same problem i have with church and temple: it
382> doesn't matter to me that peasants and scientists sit around mumbling about
382> the ways of jove or the meaning of Juno. it's those darned priests! always
382> controlling our emotions by stopping us from thinking.
382> i don't know. i think he just grabbed himself by the balls and didn't let
382> go; i believe that's how naked Celts attacked the mediterranian
382> civilization. perhaps he had a minor in history?
382> wahaa! pre-prepared piano... i can hear the shoenberg as a music hall
382> pianny! i think maybe some of the cabarets he played in for work might have
382> sounded much like this?
382> i'm a bi-mordal, schizophrenologist.
383> they were the artistic flowering of their time, as you well know! Ficino!
383> Ficino! -- and all the little teen art punks trying to out-do each other
383> with a prettier vanishing point!
383> it was an amazing time! you know about Bruno and England? and Raleigh and
383> the metaphysicians, most of whom would have been burnt at the stake as
383> heretic, if Elizabeth hadn't preempted that by chopping off their heads?
tho...@antispam.ham
384> well, ithica is kind of in the valley of the shadow of dispair; "gorges"
384> maybe being the more accurate description of the dales, particularly
384> coming from a noted scientist -- unless daffy's spell checker is broken?
384> daffy tholen,
384> at Corn Hell,
384> says hello to peter:
384> "whazz'up, peetsie?",
384> baith the troll.
384> peter answers,
384> quid pro quo:
384> "mike and daffy
384> in a bog:
384> rubber ducky dialog".
385> imagine visiting some ng not in your specialty? like the visiting three
385> stooges routine now playing in rec.music.classical?, where science-oid
385> types visit a music group and demand great respect for their personages
385> and their edicts because they have certain credentials, and know the
385> truth of things?
385> isn't the truth a little detrop here, where music is the only serious
385> topic, and all other topics must be considered less important, less
385> complete, than music? incomplete, even, and formless, since they've not
385> reached the perfection of music and mind?
385> what would be the response in a science group if we were to argue the
385> truth of velikovskian chaoticism because "mozart is divine", and we are
385> composers? wouldn't the sciensics think we were jejune to the point of
385> infantile? wouldn't they tell us that music has nothing to do with
385> astronomical or geologic history, and that, just because we'd learnt a
385> few tricks in school and had become careerists, that that won't allow us
385> to make relevant determinations in a science newsgroup?
385> and suppose that the impostures had had only the experience of living
385> shallow, self-created, lives of little fulfillment? where the only
385> dignity allowed was to bow to each other and call each other "sir" and
385> "madam", being very "respectable"? wouldn't these babbits be upset in a
385> music group? where creativity, not deceptiveness and rote drudgery, is
385> the norm? where it's common for people to insult and pillor like extended
385> family, because music itself, and not your tholonial, pauline, and
385> petrious, momentary being, is the truth? and, further, not the slave and
385> manufactured truths of the award and money driven sciences? -- if we
385> musical people can tell each other to fuk off for craven music careerists
385> and cheats, why would we not double that towards the dubious tinker-toy
385> of science and its factotums? after all, even andrew lloyd wubber is
385> musical, and we will listen to what he has to say... but the three
385> stooges know only that the marx brothers use "too many words"; three
385> stooges have nothing to say at all.
385> we assume that these three aren't interested in music itself, yes?
385> because of how they talk... the honking limp of the a-rhythmic "standard
385> usage"... and we know they are not musically knowledgeable because they
385> work so hard to change the discussion to a topic they can participate in
385> -- never being "ungentlemanly" and "crude", but, strangling the topic in
385> a cesspool of egotistic and presumptious crud.
385> yes, crud with personality!
385> so, why not the three of you give each other a hug, and then work on the
385> following problem: "can anyone understand a composer to the point of
385> predicting what he'd do with any simple folk song we presented him
385> with?" or would we always be dropping our own personality into the
385> solution? "miking" it up, so to speak?". give examples from your own
385> works.