Re: Hey Mr. Hyde!

From: Nathan C. Baker (nbaker2328_at_charter.net)
Date: 03/23/04 

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:18:02 -0500

"Alex McDonald" <alex_mcd@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c3nhdj$t4a$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> "Beth" <BethStone21@hotmail.NOSPICEDHAM.com> wrote in message
> news:uTF7c.1139$Jd1.689@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
>
> > Much like it's not at all unusual to find Pluto and Charon orbiting
> > their common sense of gravity because the Earth and the Moon do so
> > too...if you're wondering - as you probably might - the "common centre
> > of gravity" between the Earth and Moon is within the atmosphere of the
> > Earth (but, note, not within the actual crust or mantle...as moons go,
> > our "Moon" is pretty big and respectfully large in comparison to the
> > planet it spins around ;)
>
> The common centre of gravity is about 1700 kms below the Earth's surface,
> not in the atmosphere. Where did you get this one from?
>

She dreamed that the world's population was floating in the atmosphere and
came up with this explaination. Wait until she discovers psychoactive
drugs! ;-)

> > If one insists on generalising and "rules of thumb" then there is a
> > simple one that is almost always correct: "If someone is being
> > 'extreme' then they are also wrong"...from bin Laden to Bush, from
> > "real assembly" to the VB coder with their "objects" for everything,
> > from Dawkins "evangelising" aethism to fundamentalist priests shouting
> > dogma (yes, there is, in fact, NO DIFFERENCE between those last two
> > but, ironically, Dawkins does NOT see this at all...he insults people
> > "blindly following the guy who claims authority" and we are to believe
> > him on this, why exactly?
>
> Can you give a reference here? I'm not familiar with this quote from him.
>

Don't hold your breath! Notice that I was the only one who gave references
in the "influences upon the English language" debate? Everyone else claimed
to be consulting an 'authoritative tome' of some sort but failed to give an
actual reference. Perhaps they are ashamed to reveal that they are actually
reading a nazi pamphlet, comic book, or astrology chart?

Anyway, Beth obviously believes that 'lending creditablility to your
comments' means (1) repeating yourself for paragraph after paragraph so the
reader gives up trying to make any sense of what she says, and (2) going off
into wild tangents that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic she is
supposedly responding to so she can avoid actually talking about the real
subject matter and hoping the reader will forget this as well.

>
> I've had to stop here; there's just too much to refute in one go.
Honestly,
> the accuracy of this post appears inversely proportional to its size.
>

Keep going, please! This looks interesting...

Quantcast