gimme money (memetic bomb enclosed)
Autymn D. C.
busy. I'd prefer PayPal to my email address. Phillip Helbig from
sci.physics.research [wrongly] claimed that my article was too
speculative, when it was full of predictions to be verified. So rather
than payment, anyone may forward the message thither, and I'll be
almost as happy as I'd get to destroy some more people.
how to decay an electron:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/158be52bea7f1c94
how to interpret the foton's inertial mass:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/2d2c5684b8c8705d/f14e52fb6dfbceb7#f14e52fb6dfbceb7
how to eliminate time travel's paradox:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/e6f0d2b9fcf05478/3c7e3e694a6ece88#3c7e3e694a6ece88
how to end an expanding universe:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/1ab2a9ec2ec1dce2/d887ffb14761bc57#d887ffb14761bc57
how to cheat the HUP:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.particle/browse_frm/thread/f7ee2e702368b3da/d14593468f6185a9#d14593468f6185a9
how to justify classical matter waves:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/3f76d6cd94967ca2/b18a47880cdaab95#b18a47880cdaab95
so-called weak force is a misnomer for the unified electrocolor force:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/6d4906037f450e7d/003e89df84078299#003e89df84078299
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/be53d4b29964d75b
Baez and other scientists don't understand what "negative" or other
signs mean:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/2d044eb1d4fa0096/5451a4edc72c446a#5451a4edc72c446a
how to make a tunnel and elevator of arbitrary depth:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.scientists/browse_frm/thread/6e6699e727c0cbb3/93dbf32379eb9d8d#93dbf32379eb9d8d
(geohudraulics if worried)
how to launch into orbit without onboard propellant and costly drag:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/41342d2843f91e7b/7805f513b854ce13#7805f513b854ce13
(include rachet-ærostat mechanisms for latter wealth--it's an
ærovator!)
how to use less propellant for arbitrary ballistic speeds, that NASA
can't figure out:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/43f17196ea0c53ce/7efa68170852c098#7efa68170852c098
how to kick NASA and JPL in the arse:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/eab9373efd5606a1/2b6570cd5fe9d0ec#2b6570cd5fe9d0ec
how to make a lightsaber:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/565337583ad1b6ba/fbe20a2fd79b728f#fbe20a2fd79b728f
how not to fuse nuclei:
http://advancedphysics.org/viewthread.php?tid=1397
how to make a Powerbook G5:
http://egroups.com/message/free_energy/17171
how to accelerate matter to c (five screens down, after the asterisk):
http://egroups.com/message/free_energy/4069
my profile:
http://forums.about.com/dir-app/bbcard/profile_center.asp?webtag=ab-physics&uName=lysdexia
how to fix maths and write new maths:
1^2 = -1^2
(1^2)^.5 =^.5 (-1^2)^.5
±1 :: ±-1
±1 = ±1; ±-1 = ±-1
how to spell "physics" right:
Greek Latin Latin: fusice
Greek Latin English: fusica
Greek Latin New-English: fXsEcA (though this is temporary as I'll throw
out Greek and Latin loanwords when I grow up to make New English, and
I'll already have reinvented the alfabet and numbers)
how to make over the Standard Model:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Copy and paste the table below in another window, and view it in
Courier New, 90 columns. This was based on the elegance and simplicity
of the summetric and smallest basis of forces, my inspiration for
adapting the model for condensed matter interactions of greater
freedom, rewriting all interactions under a standard and decorrupted
nomenclature, and considering every possible ætiology that could be
adapted for and open the door to a reality of the Stargate model.
Some particles are intentionally named or renamed to have descriptive
entendres in many languages. If you can read into one's meaning that
is from Romance, English, or Greek, you are likely right. See if you
can find where I put the so-called strong, weak, electroweak, and
exchange forces. Think of this table as field braces: Instead of
classing forces by their strengths and ranges, such as to come up with
four forces including one unified and then more unified forces thence,
they should be classed by which postulated-ground forces are involved
in a particle interaction. As the strong force is thought to be a
color force residue, I've taken the lead to acknowledge there only
being three forces, corresponding with the extremes of scale and
strength. Then I find that the following interactions are but residues
in the remaining directions that trail off in strength and scale.
So rather than to live with the absurdity of calling one force
electromagnetism, but to leave the strong and color forces called
separately, I've broken up the former's status into the ground force
and its residue in analogy with the latter's. (This is easy and fun.)
So there are three ground-forces, six ground-residues, six two-forces,
twelve two-residues, six three-forces, and twelve three-residues. As
the forces are laid apart by sheerness, the three ground-forces given
first are known to have massless carriers and thus the greatest
reaches. As the forces are combined, their likelihood become slimmer
and following apparent strength littler; their carriers also climb in
mass, as strength is compared against mass. I don't know whether this
is monotonic though. This is why the "weak force", as explained in a
link above being only of polarised electrocolor interactions, is weaker
than the color or strong force and the electric force.
Also, as the residues trail off, the charges and carriers in the middle
of each set are easiest to find, see, and feel because of their balance
of stability and strength. (Each particle pair may be found in any
state of condensation or rarefaction, however, and their classing as
separate particles should not be interpreted as being found free when
they interact. The body-number does show whit particles normally
interact at a time, though. For Stargate thoughts, I would draw each
column heading as a whorl with N leaves showing the field outlines: The
obligatory asummetric masses for stability give a tapered trefoil,
lemniscate, and ring in three to six dimensions.) Notice then that the
midst of the ground set frames normal interactions for sound, heat, and
of course carries the very useful toy and tool forces of magnetism.
Because of its stead, it seems to be the strongest "force" around, even
though it's a secondary of electric forces. It's harder to make a
strong electret than a magnet, for example, because the charges of the
former leak easily. The obviousness of the other residues then follow
by nearness to the midst: first the ring of four around it, then the
frame of four at the tips. The residues are biased toward the top,
though, so the main axis they lie in make them easier to find and make
use of. This is, for example, why spintronics was developed much later
than electronics.
As all particles' names are classes, whatever summetric or
supersummetric pairs can belong to the eponum: So the electron and
positron fall under electron, where the electron is the more or most
common partner. (I'm compelled to call them electron and electroff,
though.) Where the neutrino would be I have made a class fitting
around it: So I class the neutrino as a neutral foron and the
hupothetical leptoquark as a charged foron. Notice that each unified
force has duals, above and below, that switch the order of its permuted
compound forces. These are the result of having one or two forces
dominant; thus, a prediction from this model is that, because all
forces are different, they cannot be combined uniformly and some must
take precedence. So it is possible to have unified forces that are
interrelated. The electron's higher flavors that exhibit some "weak"
interaction, the muon and tauon, thus go under the charged leacon
class.
The model doesn't foretell offkilterly, or obaxial, unifications
though, which would be bothersome to write out. So the found
connection between geomagnetism and gravity, or "gravomagnetism" as
represented rather than "latiomagnetism" as tabled, toward the poles as
told by /New Scientist/ ("Earth's magnetic field 'boosts gravity'":
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2814), would stall the
model from completion. New rows or another dimension would be needed
for yet more permutations, between forces and residues then. I can
foretell though, that if the hupothetical "hyperweak force", unifying
"electroweak" and "strong", is found, it will only be between the 2o3-
and 3o2-bodies, making the 2o3oo3o2 or even 3o2oo2o3 "2o2-force". Such
means that even greater unifications will yield pairs of pairs, and
will be greaterly confused with each other so that they might be
thought to show fewer forces than are there. This is the best an
untrained thinker like myself can go at this time; I'll fill in the
rest of the table when the world catches up.
The New Model
3-body ( 2-body ( 1-body N/
/R
color quark ( electrion electron ( gravor wimpon
coloral | ( electric | ( gravoral | z
colorate gluon ( electrize foton ( gravorate graviton
·.·
partion proton ( magnetism ion ( lation warpon
partial | ( magnetic | ( latial | y
partiate meson ( magnetize plasmon ( latiate dilaton
·.·
brancity seedon ( strofsis policon ( varity gearon
brancital | ( stroftic | ( varital | x
brancitate spuron ( stroftize magnon ( varitate cogon
2o3-body (( 1o3=body (( 1o2-body
N/
/R
coloroelectrion leacon (( colorogravor wefton (( electrogravor
fliton
coloroelectric | (( colorogravoral | (( electrogravoral
| z
coloroelectrize weacon (( colorogravorate lefton ((
electrogravorate lifton
·.·
partiomagnetism bolon (( partiolation crampon (( magnetolation
wefton
partiomagnetic | (( partiolatial | (( magnetolatial
| y
paritomagnetize zonon (( partiolatiate tidon (( magnetolatiate
sifton
·.·
brancitostrofsis jeton (( brancitovarity clampon (( strofovarity
fujon
brancitostroftic | (( brancitovarital | (( strofovarital
| x
brancitostroftize bagon (( brancitovaritate oddon (( strofovaritate
raton
3o2-body (( 3o1-body (( 2o1-body
electrocolor foron (( gravocolor pason (( gravoelectrion
floton
electrocoloral | (( gravocoloral | (( gravoelectric
| z
electrocolorate weucon (( gravocolorate filon (( gravoelectrize
lofton
·.·
magnetopartion curlon (( latiopartion tracton (( latiomagnetism
scwon
magnetopartial | (( latiopartial | (( latiomagnetic
| y
magnetopartiate axion (( latiopartiate rowon (( latiomagnetize
acson
·.·
strofobrancity nodon (( varitobrancity nunon (( varitostrofsis
bedon
strofobrancital | (( varitobrancital | (( varitostroftic
| x
strofobrancitate oscilon (( varitobrancitate munon (( varitostroftize
hupon
3o1o2-body ((( 2o1o3-body (((
1o2o3-body N/
/R
electrogravocolor ((( colorogravoelectrion (((
coloroelectrogravor
electrogravocoloral | ((( colorogravoelectric | (((
coloroelectrogravoral | z
electrogravocolorate ((( colorogravoelectrize (((
coloroelectrogravorate
·.·
magnetolatiopartion ((( partiolatiomagnetism (((
partiomagnetolation
magnetolatiopartial | ((( partiolatiomagnetic | (((
paritomagnetolatial | y
magnetolatiopartiate ((( partiolatiomagnetize (((
paritomagnetolatiate
·.·
strofovaritobrancity ((( brancitovaritostrofsis (((
brancitostrofovarity
strofovaritobrancial | ((( brancitovaritostroftic | (((
brancitostrofovarital | x
strofovaritobrancitate ((( brancitovaritostroftize (((
brancitostrofovaritate
3o2o1-body ((( 2o3o1-body (((
1o3o2-body
gravoelectrocolor ((( gravocoloroelectrion (((
electrocolorogravor
gravoelectrocoloral | ((( gravocoloroelectric | (((
electrocolorogravoral | z
gravoelectrocolorate ((( gravocoloroelectrize (((
electrocolorogravorate
·.·
latiomagnetopartion ((( latiopartiomagnetism (((
magnetopartiolation
latiomagnetopartial | ((( latiopartiomagnetic | (((
magnetopartiolatial | y
latiomagnetopartiate ((( latiopartiomagnetize (((
magnetopartiolatiate
·.·
varitostrofobrancity ((( varitobrancitostrofsis (((
strofobrancitovarity
varitostrofobrancital | ((( varitobrancitostroftic | (((
strofobrancitovarital | x
varitostrofobrancitate ((( varitobrancitostroftize (((
strofobrancitovaritate
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is only a shred of my might. If I weren't so distracted and lazy,
I'd be taking over the world. *sigh* I'm going off to play some new
rogue-like game.
-Aut
The first Peano axiom is wrong. Hail Kronecker's!
antiApple PC weenies, eat this:
18th Annual Reader Satisfaction Survey by PC Magaine: Desktops &
Notebooks
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1851295,00.asp
oh, how to destroy the faithful (fakeful):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/ebb152e2f74070b6/5a92464344ea6149#5a92464344ea6149
Romans 14:14 says that morality is subjective: I'm a tireless
lifedasher.
Catholics, Muslims, and other primitive mentalities, eat this:
http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/droplets/globrock.htm
donsto...@hotmail.com
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors
Autymn D. C. wrote:
<snip deluded crap>
> my profile:
>http://forums.about.com/dir-app/bbcard/profile_center.asp?webtag=ab-physics&uName=lysdexia
//Begin qoute//
"Relationship Status
Has anyone ever found how much life sucks after being in love with
someone who doesn't know you exist, and then who gets married? oh, and
how marriage sucks, and what comes after... I'm really depressed.
Watching the news at five in the morning used to make me happy".
//End quote//
Awwww. Poor you. Bwahahaha.
> how to fix maths and write new maths:
> 1^2 = -1^2
> (1^2)^.5 =^.5 (-1^2)^.5
> ±1 :: ±-1
> ±1 = ±1; ±-1 = ±-1
Idiot.
> how to spell "physics" right:
> Greek Latin Latin: fusice
> Greek Latin English: fusica
> Greek Latin New-English: fXsEcA (though this is temporary as I'll throw
> out Greek and Latin loanwords when I grow up to make New English, and
> I'll already have reinvented the alfabet and numbers)
Using "f"s instead of "ph"s is not a good basis for a new language, and
it looks pretty stupid, phuckwit.
> how to make over the Standard Model:
<snip more crap>
Mark Martin
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors wrote:
> Idiot.
Autymn just got herself banned from advancedphysics.org for her
doo-doo.
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> Awwww. Poor you. Bwahahaha.
~~~~~~
33. Autymn D. C. Sep 2, 1:43 am show options
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors wrote:
> Autymn D. C. wrote:
> > decorrupted spelling:
> > lie -> lige
> > lying -> lyging
> Anally retentive moron.
You're the one who sent me a picture of naked women with their behinds
facing, and are the author of some dumb blog called Cherenkov
Radiation, David Taylor.
Reply
34. Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors Sep 2, 6:05 am show options
Autymn D. C. wrote:
> Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors wrote:
> > Autymn D. C. wrote:
> > > decorrupted spelling:
> > > lie -> lige
> > > lying -> lyging
> > Anally retentive moron.
> You're the one who sent me a picture of naked women with their behinds
> facing, and are the author of some dumb blog called Cherenkov
> Radiation, David Taylor.
Make that anally retentive lying moron.
Reply
35. Autymn D. C. Sep 2, 6:29 pm show options
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors wrote:
> Make that anally retentive lying moron.
I am not a fool but I am lying in bed as I write this. So the word you
meant was lyging, even though I never do lige. Note that David is the
pathological liar who posed as a psychologist troll starting the thread
that Uncle Al has Asperger's syndrome.
-Aut
~~~~~~
> Idiot.
Yes you are.
> Using "f"s instead of "ph"s is not a good basis for a new language, and
> it looks pretty stupid, phuckwit.
Indefensible illiterate luser.
> <snip more crap>
Snip your trollpole.
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
No, they got me banned because they think losing my contributions is
preferable to having to know what they're writing wrong. And they
think that people who correct people's spelling in private should be
kicked off, even though I was also trying to help tutor them with all
the science questions. They harassed me and didn't care. I cared, and
complained, and fixed, so they call me the harasser because they're
cretins.
Autymn D. C.
Thomson in Usenet and eGroups, but it doesn't matter who you are as no
one cares. You're a Dick.
Mark Martin
Well, there are two kinds of people, those who have something to
say, and those who fret endlessly over spelling.
It's interesting to note that there are no "correct" ways to spell
words, but only conventional ways.
-Mark Martin
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors
I think you're getting yourself confused again. My name isn't Richard
Taylor, or David Thomson, or any combination of these.
In future, think before you type (for a change).
Autymn D. C.
> Well, there are two kinds of people, those who have something to
> say, and those who fret endlessly over spelling.
>
> It's interesting to note that there are no "correct" ways to spell
> words, but only conventional ways.
I am both or neither kind. It's the corrected who fret. And wrong,
there /are/ correct ways to spell words. Everything has a rhyme and
reason; people deliberately spell words somehow for a reason over
another how. Everything can be ranked and culled, and the right and
wrong will have stayed to the end.
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
> I think you're getting yourself confused again. My name isn't Richard
> Taylor, or David Thomson, or any combination of these.
Richard Taylor was the name in your emails. You started emailing me
from nowhere calling me silly, and I assumed you were doing it from the
newsgroups. Then I read your signature and went to your website for
some payback. But as I said, no one cares who you are.
> In future, think before you type (for a change).
tupe
Don't tell me what I do and you don't as I know already.
-Aut
Mark Martin
Nope. There are *NO* irreducibly correct spellings of words. It's
*ALL* convention. It's *ALL* concordance between parties engaging in
dialogue. To say that there are immutably correct ways to spell words
is like saying there's only one such language with which to exchange
ideas. Yet, the co-existence of French, Russian, English, Portugese,
etc., is an empirical fact. Language is algebraic context. Read some
Wittgenstein.
I can't help noticing that you always seem to understand people quite
well enough to know what is in need of correction. If you grasp their
meaning that well, then there is no correction needed. At most, when
one is too inarticulate to convey meaning, then what is required is
*clarification*, not correction.
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> Nope. There are *NO* irreducibly correct spellings of words. It's
> *ALL* convention. It's *ALL* concordance between parties engaging in
> dialogue. To say that there are immutably correct ways to spell words
> is like saying there's only one such language with which to exchange
> ideas. Yet, the co-existence of French, Russian, English, Portugese,
> etc., is an empirical fact. Language is algebraic context. Read some
> Wittgenstein.
French and all languages corrupting Latin are wrong. Languages which
build and differentiate without corrupting are right. Languages which
have internally- and externally-consistent rules are better.
Efficient, versatile, and fundamental languages are best. The French
grammar board agrees that there are serious problems with French's
suntax compared with English's, and have tried to reform it. If words
are not spoken as they're spelt, one or both is wrong. Look at how the
retard tj Frazir writes and tell me that he's not wrong.
> I can't help noticing that you always seem to understand people quite
> well enough to know what is in need of correction. If you grasp their
> meaning that well, then there is no correction needed. At most, when
> one is too inarticulate to convey meaning, then what is required is
> *clarification*, not correction.
If people do not write as they think or mean, then they are incorrect.
-Aut
Mark Martin
Autymn D. C. wrote:
> French and all languages corrupting Latin are wrong. Languages which
> build and differentiate without corrupting are right. Languages which
> have internally- and externally-consistent rules are better.
> Efficient, versatile, and fundamental languages are best. The French
> grammar board agrees that there are serious problems with French's
> suntax compared with English's, and have tried to reform it. If words
> are not spoken as they're spelt, one or both is wrong. Look at how the
> retard tj Frazir writes and tell me that he's not wrong.
My issue here is not the effectiveness of one's employment of
language. It is rather that no one owns another's language. At most you
own your language. And by "your" I don't mean French, or English, or
whatever. I mean whatever your thoughts cause to come out of your
mouth, your pen, your keyboard. And quite bluntly, I hold suspicious
anyone who would presume to know better than people themselves what
language they "ought" to be speaking. Ebonics, for instance, may be
grossly inadequate for handling rich & subtle concepts. But I'm not
about to hold its adoptors responsible to me personally for their
choice to use it. I'd much rather live in a free society than one with
the Nazistic uniformity that you appear to prefer.
And what about Frazir? I've been arguing with that moron for years.
But the issue with such a character isn't his spelling. It's the
absurdity of his outrageous claims. He utters propositions which I find
to be in sore need of vindication, and I call him on it.
> > I can't help noticing that you always seem to understand people quite
> > well enough to know what is in need of correction. If you grasp their
> > meaning that well, then there is no correction needed. At most, when
> > one is too inarticulate to convey meaning, then what is required is
> > *clarification*, not correction.
>
> If people do not write as they think or mean, then they are incorrect.
Nope. They're not incorrect. They're just not effectively
communicative. When my dog barks, he probably means to say something.
The fact that I don't speak dog doesn't make his language wrong. It
just makes him unable to get his point across.
-Mark Martin
Schoenfeld
> build and differentiate without corrupting are right. Languages which
> have internally- and externally-consistent rules are better.
> Efficient, versatile, and fundamental languages are best. The French
> grammar board agrees that there are serious problems with French's
> suntax compared with English's, and have tried to reform it. If words
> are not spoken as they're spelt, one or both is wrong. Look at how the
> retard tj Frazir writes and tell me that he's not wrong.
ALL languages are inconsistent. Lambda calculus, the mother of all
languages, suffers Russels paradox and thus is inconsistent. Godel
proved that.
Autymn D. C.
> ALL languages are inconsistent. Lambda calculus, the mother of all
> languages, suffers Russels paradox and thus is inconsistent. Godel
> proved that.
The construction is inconsistent, not the means.
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
> My issue here is not the effectiveness of one's employment of
> language. It is rather that no one owns another's language. At most you
> own your language. And by "your" I don't mean French, or English, or
> whatever. I mean whatever your thoughts cause to come out of your
> mouth, your pen, your keyboard. And quite bluntly, I hold suspicious
Owning one does not mean owning judgement. Though owning judgement is
earned by anyone learning enough about the subject, just in case you're
suggesting that being born into a language makes one own it and its
use.
> anyone who would presume to know better than people themselves what
> language they "ought" to be speaking. Ebonics, for instance, may be
> grossly inadequate for handling rich & subtle concepts. But I'm not
> about to hold its adoptors responsible to me personally for their
> choice to use it. I'd much rather live in a free society than one with
> the Nazistic uniformity that you appear to prefer.
I'm antinational and antisocialist. I hate everyone and everything,
which is how I've gotten ahead. If Ebonics "trips itself", then it is
nominally wrong. The speakers must know what they're talking about
first before claiming their language is okay. Its first failure, along
with a slim shred of Old English's and most Romances', is its additive
rather than multiplicative negation. That has to go. :)
> And what about Frazir? I've been arguing with that moron for years.
> But the issue with such a character isn't his spelling. It's the
> absurdity of his outrageous claims. He utters propositions which I find
> to be in sore need of vindication, and I call him on it.
Yeah it is. They're all connected.
> Nope. They're not incorrect. They're just not effectively
> communicative. When my dog barks, he probably means to say something.
> The fact that I don't speak dog doesn't make his language wrong. It
> just makes him unable to get his point across.
You as the foreigner have nothing to do with it. If he barks as he
means, then he's right. If not, struggling and whimpering trying to
speak his mind--as opposed to trying some other means--then he's wrong.
-Aut
Mark Martin
No, you're entirely wrong about it all. You've no objectivity, no
sense of abstraction. You hate everyone and everything. This has gotten
you ahead? Ahead of what? I'd say you're lagging far behind. Your
overwelming hatred has anchored you to a spot as others make progress.
-Mark Martin
Mark Martin
which you intend to bring about the downfall of all mankind by way of
your awesome powers.
-Mark Martin
donsto...@hotmail.com
reform the System.
Mark Martin
donstockba...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Sometimes one might appear to hate everything yet is merely trying to
> reform the System.
I am merely quoting her. She herself said in that last post that she
hates everyone and everything. And if you do a Google search (lysdexia,
Autymn D. C.), you find some interesting stuff. Apparently she intends
to destroy human culture worldwide.
She's also being inconsistent. She said point blank that she's
antisocialist, yet wants to enforce a rigid uniformity of language,
with herself as arbiter. That's not socialist? It's *National*
socialist: Nazi.
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> No, you're entirely wrong about it all. You've no objectivity, no
> sense of abstraction. You hate everyone and everything. This has gotten
> you ahead? Ahead of what? I'd say you're lagging far behind. Your
> overwelming hatred has anchored you to a spot as others make progress.
overwhelming
I've all objectivity and much abstraction. Where are you pulling these
claims out of? Stop talking like a chatbot and start elaborating on
referents, or go away.
Autymn D. C.
> She's also being inconsistent. She said point blank that she's
> antisocialist, yet wants to enforce a rigid uniformity of language,
> with herself as arbiter. That's not socialist? It's *National*
> socialist: Nazi.
I didn't say only myself, but anyone who's fit to think and make. You
don't even know what those terms mean, fogey. Besides, I already put
my political stance in my profile. Note it.
Autymn D. C.
I tried to take over Wikipedia, but Safari kept hanging after having
hundreds of tabs open and having opened thousands of pages. *sigh* But
at least it on a PBG4 lasted a few times longer than IE on a Pavilion,
which crashed easily. My mind has more stamina than a good computer.
I don't believe for one moment that John Doe could get far on his
iMacs, accesswise, other than speedreading and speedwriting. I have
too many distractions, tasks, and slackings to make a big move. I
can't even get a website up because I haven't written the many articles
I want.
-Aut
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors
Au contraire. You do have a website, albeit a really crappy one.
Namely:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EsotericWorldNews/
There is a nice photo of you there, demonstrating the fact that you are
a post-menopausal hag.
Have a nice time there, debating the finer points of alien abduction,
you weird, aged kook.
Autymn D. C.
> Au contraire. You do have a website, albeit a really crappy one.
>
> Namely:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EsotericWorldNews/
>
> There is a nice photo of you there, demonstrating the fact that you are
> a post-menopausal hag.
>
> Have a nice time there, debating the finer points of alien abduction,
> you weird, aged kook.
Fuckhead, that is Lorraine Bede-something-ski, the writer of the
defunct newsletter and owner of the group. She posts distinctly
separate from me. I found her group from her website. She might be
the best that you can get, so stop knocking her.
-Aut
Get real:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/661287792faf5cde
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors
Autymn D. C. wrote:
> Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors wrote:
> > Au contraire. You do have a website, albeit a really crappy one.
> >
> > Namely:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EsotericWorldNews/
> >
> > There is a nice photo of you there, demonstrating the fact that you are
> > a post-menopausal hag.
> >
> > Have a nice time there, debating the finer points of alien abduction,
> > you weird, aged kook.
>
> Fuckhead, that is Lorraine Bede-something-ski, the writer of the
> defunct newsletter and owner of the group. She posts distinctly
> separate from me. I found her group from her website. She might be
> the best that you can get, so stop knocking her.
That site was listed in your profile as being your own personal
website.
This either means:
A. You are profoundly stupid, or B. You are an ancient, withered, kooky
hag and that photo really is of you, or C. You're both A and B !
My money's on C.
Autymn D. C.
> That site was listed in your profile as being your own personal
> website.
>
> This either means:
> A. You are profoundly stupid, or B. You are an ancient, withered, kooky
> hag and that photo really is of you, or C. You're both A and B !
>
> My money's on C.
D. It was personal because I posted there. You failed the logical and
scientific method, and you lose whatever money you put on C. You have
a twisted scale of stupidity, and you are beyond deeply stupid.
Mark Martin
One's choices constitute information. That you chose to post on your
profile page a link to such drivel without clarification makes one
wonder...
The very act of posting a link to your profile, as the terminal of a
whole slew of self-applauding links, is also quite suspect. You
obviously want people to know *something* about you, and are afraid to
let them take their own sweet time about it.
Finally, it's all too ironic that you harp on others' spelling
"errors", yet display your own such flaws, as is on long term record in
the Usenet archives.
-Mark Martin
Edward Green
> Mark Martin wrote:
> French and all languages corrupting Latin are wrong.
That's an interesting idea. Since all romance languages are
corruptions of Latin, they are wrong. I like it. They should be
taught to speak correct Latin.
> Languages which
> build and differentiate without corrupting are right. Languages which
> have internally- and externally-consistent rules are better.
> Efficient, versatile, and fundamental languages are best. The French
> grammar board agrees that there are serious problems with French's
> suntax compared with English's, and have tried to reform it. If words
> are not spoken as they're spelt, one or both is wrong.
Well again, I can't disagree. Compared to Spanish or German --
languages pronounceable based on the written forms and a smallish rule
set -- French is wrong. English is shaky.
> Look at how the
> retard tj Frazir writes and tell me that he's not wrong.
Can't agree with you there. tj is an artist. ;-)
Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors
This http://cherenkov-radiation.blogspot.com/ is my personal website,
because I set it up and write everything therein.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics is not my personal website,
even though I post here.
Do you get this? Can you see the distinction?
Just how much of a spewing idiotic imbecile are you?
Autymn D. C.
> One's choices constitute information. That you chose to post on your
> profile page a link to such drivel without clarification makes one
> wonder...
It's a matter of the greater degree in a proportion between there and
all the places I posted. Richard Taylor has no sense of this, using
his fictive black-white-determining skills to litter the internet with
misinformation. Does my choice of putting a flying triangle as a
Personal Photo make me look like one? Obviously not, but ye were not
smart or sincere enough to use such reasoning against yerselves. Any
site that is personal to me is my personal site. It's not my homepage,
which still has two meanings: that which I made, and that which opens
in my browser automatically.
> The very act of posting a link to your profile, as the terminal of a
> whole slew of self-applauding links, is also quite suspect. You
> obviously want people to know *something* about you, and are afraid to
> let them take their own sweet time about it.
suspect how?
> Finally, it's all too ironic that you harp on others' spelling
> "errors", yet display your own such flaws, as is on long term record in
> the Usenet archives.
I have none such. No one can win against me because I understand more,
being many steps ahead of everyone's shoddy worldview.
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
On this subject somewhat, I'm waging war on the status quo on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elision. Grab some popcorn and have
a blast.
-Aut
Mark Martin
Autymn D. C. wrote:
> > The very act of posting a link to your profile, as the terminal of a
> > whole slew of self-applauding links, is also quite suspect. You
> > obviously want people to know *something* about you, and are afraid to
> > let them take their own sweet time about it.
>
> suspect how?
How? You're begging for attention. That's how.
> > Finally, it's all too ironic that you harp on others' spelling
> > "errors", yet display your own such flaws, as is on long term record in
> > the Usenet archives.
>
> I have none such.
Heh! The very title of this thread, started by you, is incorrect.
It's not "gimme". It's "gi'me". There are others. Go back and look.
> No one can win against me because I understand more,
> being many steps ahead of everyone's shoddy worldview.
Sure. We're all trembling.
You know, there was an old B.C. comic strip, in which Peter
announces that he's holding & entering a new competition, a race. Thor
asks, "What's the race called?". Peter replies, "It's the 'Human'
race", to which Thor replies, "You've just disqualified yourself."
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> How? You're begging for attention. That's how.
Anyone who posts anything begs for attention.
> Heh! The very title of this thread, started by you, is incorrect.
> It's not "gimme". It's "gi'me". There are others. Go back and look.
So is "an egg" also wrong, which should be "a egg"? "gimme" is a
stulized portmanteau. I make no such mistakes, and can destroy your
own including where you think I've mistaken.
> You know, there was an old B.C. comic strip, in which Peter
> announces that he's holding & entering a new competition, a race. Thor
> asks, "What's the race called?". Peter replies, "It's the 'Human'
> race", to which Thor replies, "You've just disqualified yourself."
why?
-Aut
donsto...@hotmail.com
> How? You're begging for attention. That's how.
Anyone who posts anything begs for attention.
********
False. There are those God-like figures who merely wish to correct
your errors and then don't care what you reply with, as they're on the
metasystem level. No feedback desired. Have a nice day.
Mark Martin
Autymn D. C. wrote:
> So is "an egg" also wrong, which should be "a egg"? "gimme" is a
> stulized portmanteau. I make no such mistakes, and can destroy your
> own including where you think I've mistaken.
That's right. It's stulised.
> why?
There you go again.
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> That's right. It's stulised.
No, it's stulized. Learn proper Greek. Go away.
-Aut
Mark Martin
Exactly what did traumatise you so badly at an earlier age?
-Mark Martin
Mark Martin
Incidentally, having perused the 'net, I find no such word in the
Greek language according to my sources. On the other hand, there is
clearly such a thing as a "stylized" portmanteau, and the letters (y,u)
are exactly adjacent on a standard keyboard. I think you just hit the
wrong key, and aren't adult enough to own up to it. I mean it figures-
anyone who likes Ducktales and Grimm Adventures (of Billy & Mandy?)...
*Sheeesh!!*
-Mark Martin
Autymn D. C.
> False. There are those God-like figures who merely wish to correct
> your errors and then don't care what you reply with, as they're on the
> metasystem level. No feedback desired. Have a nice day.
Non sequitur, the correction needs attention. /Caring/ about the reply
has nothing to do with it. Go away.
-Aut
Josie Margolis
Go away? He already did. You and I, on the other hand, are still here
reading this thread.
Autymn D. C.
> Incidentally, having perused the 'net, I find no such word in the
> Greek language according to my sources. On the other hand, there is
> clearly such a thing as a "stylized" portmanteau, and the letters (y,u)
Stulized is Greek English, bypassing the corruptive Latin ypsilon (no
such letter) and -ise (wrong language).
> are exactly adjacent on a standard keyboard. I think you just hit the
> wrong key, and aren't adult enough to own up to it. I mean it figures-
I hit the right key. In this case it was on the rightward.
> anyone who likes Ducktales and Grimm Adventures (of Billy & Mandy?)...
> *Sheeesh!!*
Grim.
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
It's traumatize. Use Greek endings for Greek words. I used to be
everything I hated at the earlier age; everyone mocked, humiliated, and
tortured me for it; then through the suffering I became someone wholly
different and opposite. I am not how I was made; I defied God, man,
and science. (I can teach others.)
-Aut
Autymn D. C.
> Incidentally, having perused the 'net, I find no such word in the
> Greek language according to my sources. On the other hand, there is
> clearly such a thing as a "stylized" portmanteau, and the letters (y,u)
Stulized is Greek English, bypassing the corruptive Latin ypsilon (no
such letter) and -ise (wrong language).
> are exactly adjacent on a standard keyboard. I think you just hit the
> wrong key, and aren't adult enough to own up to it. I mean it figures-
I hit the right key. In this case it was on the rightward.
> anyone who likes Ducktales and Grimm Adventures (of Billy & Mandy?)...
> *Sheeesh!!*
Grim.
-Aut
Josie Margolis
Does the rot and decay that you send oozing out of your pores really
protect you from the mockery and humiliation? Do your howls of denial
drown it out? And what is it that keeps G-G-Georgia on your mind?
Autymn D. C.
> Does the rot and decay that you send oozing out of your pores really
> protect you from the mockery and humiliation? Do your howls of denial
> drown it out? And what is it that keeps G-G-Georgia on your mind?
non sequitur, lige, the news