BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$ (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/509-re-can-tow-florida-northeast-%24%24.html)

basskisser September 12th 03 12:41 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
"NOYB" wrote in message k.net...
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Now let's see if you're
really a man


That's the funniest thing I've read all day. basskisser a "man"? Maybe a
girly man...


What a simp you are. I'm more of a man than you will ever be.

basskisser September 12th 03 12:42 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:43:19 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Now let's see if you're
really a man


That's the funniest thing I've read all day. basskisser a "man"? Maybe a
girly man...


Well, here's his chance to show he's just a little bit more than a girly
man.

Steve


Steve, if you don't think I"m MUCH more man than you, let's meet up
somewhere. Perhaps if you get down this way, we'll go to my dojo and
see how much Karate experience you have?

basskisser September 12th 03 01:00 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:43:19 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Now let's see if you're
really a man


That's the funniest thing I've read all day. basskisser a "man"? Maybe a
girly man...


Well, here's his chance to show he's just a little bit more than a girly
man.

Steve


Sure thing, putz. Now, the man part, do you want to come here, or do
you want me to come there? Here is your lie:

Okay, here you go, try to follow along:

On 08/20/03 at 6:20 PST you wrote:

Unfortunately, this is one area many people neglect. I've been guilty
of it myself.

Okay, now, in that sentence you ADMIT that you are "guilty of
neglect", correct?

Then on 08/22/03 at 6:20 PST you wrote:

Then when I explained why I didn't change heat exhanger pencil zinc
and
that the real reason was more than just neglect, you snipped out the
explanation and responded with:

Okay, so now, we have, in two days you saying:

"I've been guilty of it (neglect) myself" did you not?

Then, when I said it takes a real simpleton to neglect your zincs, you
came up with:

"the real reason was more than just neglect"

There you have it. At first you say you are indeed guilty of neglect,
then when asked about it,
spin it to, well, it was more than neglect....liar.

Steven Shelikoff September 13th 03 08:11 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 12 Sep 2003 05:00:58 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:43:19 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Now let's see if you're
really a man

That's the funniest thing I've read all day. basskisser a "man"? Maybe a
girly man...


Well, here's his chance to show he's just a little bit more than a girly
man.

Steve


Sure thing, putz. Now, the man part, do you want to come here, or do
you want me to come there? Here is your lie:

Okay, here you go, try to follow along:

On 08/20/03 at 6:20 PST you wrote:

Unfortunately, this is one area many people neglect. I've been guilty
of it myself.

Okay, now, in that sentence you ADMIT that you are "guilty of
neglect", correct?

Then on 08/22/03 at 6:20 PST you wrote:

Then when I explained why I didn't change heat exhanger pencil zinc
and
that the real reason was more than just neglect, you snipped out the
explanation and responded with:

Okay, so now, we have, in two days you saying:

"I've been guilty of it (neglect) myself" did you not?

Then, when I said it takes a real simpleton to neglect your zincs, you
came up with:

"the real reason was more than just neglect"

There you have it. At first you say you are indeed guilty of neglect,
then when asked about it,
spin it to, well, it was more than neglect....liar.


Just because you're too stupid to understand english doesn't mean I'm a
liar. Are you really that moronic to understand that someone can be
guilt of neglect and more than just neglect at the same time? You said
you could show somewhere that I said I was NOT guilty of neglect. You
haven't done that yet. All you've done is to show where I said I was
indeed guilty of neglect and more than neglect. So you still owe me an
apology.

Steve

basskisser September 14th 03 06:30 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Now you realize you're too stupid to engage in verbal combat so you want
to get "physical"? Classic case of a stupid bully who got his bass
kicked for being dumb when he was a kid.

Steve


Quite the opposite, Steve. I just figure, since you are a Karate
expert, you'd show ME something. Your dojo, or mine?

basskisser September 14th 03 06:32 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Just because you're too stupid to understand english doesn't mean I'm a
liar. Are you really that moronic to understand that someone can be
guilt of neglect and more than just neglect at the same time? You said
you could show somewhere that I said I was NOT guilty of neglect. You
haven't done that yet. All you've done is to show where I said I was
indeed guilty of neglect and more than neglect. So you still owe me an
apology.

Steve


You are just too ****ing stupid to be shown ANYTHING. You said "it was
more than neglect." Now, are you really so dumb that you think
"neglect" and "more than neglect" mean the same thing?

Steven Shelikoff September 14th 03 09:32 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 14 Sep 2003 10:32:20 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Just because you're too stupid to understand english doesn't mean I'm a
liar. Are you really that moronic to understand that someone can be
guilt of neglect and more than just neglect at the same time? You said
you could show somewhere that I said I was NOT guilty of neglect. You
haven't done that yet. All you've done is to show where I said I was
indeed guilty of neglect and more than neglect. So you still owe me an
apology.


You are just too ****ing stupid to be shown ANYTHING. You said "it was
more than neglect." Now, are you really so dumb that you think
"neglect" and "more than neglect" mean the same thing?


Man are you an idiot. You really can't be an engineer because then you
would know something about set theory. It's obvious you don't know a
thing about it if you think that someone first saying they were guilty
of neglect and then adding they were also guilty of more than neglect
means they were lying when they said they were guilty of neglect.

You still owe me an apology because you haven't yet shown where I said I
*wasn't* guilty of neglect, like you claimed you could. You really
can't be so stupid as to think that being guilty of neglect and more
than neglect means the same thing as not being guilty of neglect. Can
you? Well, I guess you can be that stupid. You've proved you are over
and over again. This is just another fine example.

At some point I think we're going to have to recap all of your
stupidity again. That's always fun.

Steve

basskisser September 15th 03 12:01 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 14 Sep 2003 10:32:20 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Just because you're too stupid to understand english doesn't mean I'm a
liar. Are you really that moronic to understand that someone can be
guilt of neglect and more than just neglect at the same time? You said
you could show somewhere that I said I was NOT guilty of neglect. You
haven't done that yet. All you've done is to show where I said I was
indeed guilty of neglect and more than neglect. So you still owe me an
apology.


You are just too ****ing stupid to be shown ANYTHING. You said "it was
more than neglect." Now, are you really so dumb that you think
"neglect" and "more than neglect" mean the same thing?


Man are you an idiot. You really can't be an engineer because then you
would know something about set theory. It's obvious you don't know a
thing about it if you think that someone first saying they were guilty
of neglect and then adding they were also guilty of more than neglect
means they were lying when they said they were guilty of neglect.


Set theory doesn't apply, when you are spinning out of control, there.
You see, the flaw in your above idiotic diatribe is this: you didn't
say that you were ALSO guilty of "more than neglect." The difference
is so simple, I'd think that even you can figure it out, but maybe
not. You see, you said that you were guilty of "neglect", then when
confronted, said you were "guilty of more than neglect. Now, again, I
ask, do you honestly believe that "neglect", and "guilty of more than
neglect" mean the same identical thing?

You still owe me an apology because you haven't yet shown where I said I
*wasn't* guilty of neglect, like you claimed you could. You really
can't be so stupid as to think that being guilty of neglect and more
than neglect means the same thing as not being guilty of neglect. Can
you? Well, I guess you can be that stupid. You've proved you are over
and over again. This is just another fine example.

At some point I think we're going to have to recap all of your
stupidity again. That's always fun.


Again, simple question, so please, give a simple answer. Do you
honestly think that "guilty of neglect", and "guilty of more than
neglect" means the same thing? Are you REALLY that stupid?
Steve


Backyard Renegade September 15th 03 01:05 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(basskisser) wrote in message . com...
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:43:19 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Now let's see if you're
really a man

That's the funniest thing I've read all day. basskisser a "man"? Maybe a
girly man...


Well, here's his chance to show he's just a little bit more than a girly
man.

Steve


Steve, if you don't think I"m MUCH more man than you, let's meet up
somewhere. Perhaps if you get down this way, we'll go to my dojo and
see how much Karate experience you have?


Oh, you got a dojo? How much do I need to spend to get a black belt?
Cause I certainly could not aquire chi from someone without any...

Florida Keyz September 15th 03 01:56 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
did you guys ever think you are only talking to each other, that nobody really
cares?
'
hmmm

Steven Shelikoff September 15th 03 11:28 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 15 Sep 2003 12:56:33 GMT, (Florida Keyz) wrote:

did you guys ever think you are only talking to each other, that nobody really
cares?


I've thought of that. But that's also the case with about 90% of the
other posts. The fact that this is confined to only 2 or 3 threads that
are already dead makes it very easy for someone who doesn't really care
to ignore it. Just kill the thread. You don't even have to waste
bandwidth to download the messages if you kill the thread.

Steve

Steven Shelikoff September 15th 03 11:28 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 15 Sep 2003 04:01:20 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 14 Sep 2003 10:32:20 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Just because you're too stupid to understand english doesn't mean I'm a
liar. Are you really that moronic to understand that someone can be
guilt of neglect and more than just neglect at the same time? You said
you could show somewhere that I said I was NOT guilty of neglect. You
haven't done that yet. All you've done is to show where I said I was
indeed guilty of neglect and more than neglect. So you still owe me an
apology.

You are just too ****ing stupid to be shown ANYTHING. You said "it was
more than neglect." Now, are you really so dumb that you think
"neglect" and "more than neglect" mean the same thing?


Man are you an idiot. You really can't be an engineer because then you
would know something about set theory. It's obvious you don't know a
thing about it if you think that someone first saying they were guilty
of neglect and then adding they were also guilty of more than neglect
means they were lying when they said they were guilty of neglect.


Set theory doesn't apply, when you are spinning out of control, there.
You see, the flaw in your above idiotic diatribe is this: you didn't
say that you were ALSO guilty of "more than neglect." The difference
is so simple, I'd think that even you can figure it out, but maybe
not. You see, you said that you were guilty of "neglect", then when
confronted, said you were "guilty of more than neglect. Now, again, I
ask, do you honestly believe that "neglect", and "guilty of more than
neglect" mean the same identical thing?


You're pretty stupid if you think that whether or not they mean the same
identical thing has any bearing at all. For you to be right, if someone
says they are taller than 5' and then also says they are taller than 6'
then they were lying when they said they were taller than 5' if they are
6'3". After all, taller than 5' and taller than 6' do not mean the same
exact thing. You can be taller than 5' and taller than 6' at the same
time even if they don't mean the same thing,

In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Steve

basskisser September 16th 03 02:21 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Steve


Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.


Steven Shelikoff September 17th 03 05:46 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.


Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.


You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

Steve

basskisser September 17th 03 12:20 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.


Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.


You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

Steve


It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,
as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

Steven Shelikoff September 17th 03 12:46 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.


You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.


It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,


And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.


First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

basskisser September 18th 03 12:19 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.


It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,


And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.


First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.


You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

Steven Shelikoff September 18th 03 12:53 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,


And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.


First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.


You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!


From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Steve

basskisser September 19th 03 11:46 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.


You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!


From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Steve


Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?

Steven Shelikoff September 20th 03 05:39 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!


From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.


Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?


Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.

Steve

basskisser September 22nd 03 02:37 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.


Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?


Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.

Steve


I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.

Florida Keyz September 22nd 03 03:02 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
This has to be a record length of blasting each other. Congratulations!

Steven Shelikoff September 22nd 03 11:49 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 22 Sep 2003 06:37:30 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?


Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.


I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.


You, TEACH?? That's a good joke. First you have to be able to learn
something in order to teach it. And you have shown you are utterly
incapable of learning.

Steve

M.E. September 23rd 03 06:41 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
Someone needs to call Guinness... I'm sure this thread sets a few records!


"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
On 22 Sep 2003 06:37:30 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message

...
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message

...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser)
wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message

...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser)
wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message

...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser)
wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of

neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone

claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were

guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying

when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show

anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's

necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that

(and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means

the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach

you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they

aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with

the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That

has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of

neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show

anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show

anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an

apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a

liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then,

when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot.

And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot.

More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple

conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken

stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie?

Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the

part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just

stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change

it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for

calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I

had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you

had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are

dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I

"simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally

realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when

you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So

instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?

Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.


I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.


You, TEACH?? That's a good joke. First you have to be able to learn
something in order to teach it. And you have shown you are utterly
incapable of learning.

Steve




basskisser September 23rd 03 12:28 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 22 Sep 2003 06:37:30 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?

Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.


I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.


You, TEACH?? That's a good joke. First you have to be able to learn
something in order to teach it. And you have shown you are utterly
incapable of learning.

Steve


This shows just how much you DON'T know. Let's see, I teach three
Karate classes a week. I assist one of my fellow engineers, who
teaches civil design courses at a local community college a few times
a month. I work with my daughter EVERY evening, she's a straight "A"
student.
What do you teach, outside of how to ACT like you are an expert in
EVERYTHING??

Steven Shelikoff September 23rd 03 02:12 PM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
On 23 Sep 2003 04:28:36 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 22 Sep 2003 06:37:30 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same
thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?

as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?

Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.

I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.


You, TEACH?? That's a good joke. First you have to be able to learn
something in order to teach it. And you have shown you are utterly
incapable of learning.


This shows just how much you DON'T know. Let's see, I teach three
Karate classes a week. I assist one of my fellow engineers, who


Your students should get a refund based on what you've said here.

teaches civil design courses at a local community college a few times


Probably because you don't know enough about it to teach the course
yourself.

a month. I work with my daughter EVERY evening, she's a straight "A"
student.


We already know your daughter is smarter than you.

You obviously can't teach anything about engine design since you can't
even answer very simple questions about it. Examples: Do you think NONE
of the oil vapor that leaves the crankcase and gets routed to the intake
via the PCV valve and breather actually makes it to the intake? And if
you think some of it does make it to the intake, do you think NONE of it
gets burned?

You obviously can't teach honesty since you've been caught in a blatent
lie twice. Examples: Walt - the guy who claims not to read a 2 line
post before responding to it when the response is keyed to the post.

You obviously can't teach english since you don't know the meaning of
simple words. Example: neglect.

You obviously can't teach simple set theory. Example: you don't know
the meaning of subset and superset because don't think it's possible for
someone to be guilty of neglect and more than neglect at the same time.

You obviously can't teach even a rudimentary fluid dynamics course.
Example: you think the pressure at the top of a compressor's piston is
the same as in the tank when the compressor is filling the tank.

I could go on and on, but I'll stop for now.

Steve

Dan Krueger September 24th 03 01:57 AM

Can Tow from Florida to Northeast for $$
 
Please keep quoting the entire text. I don't want to miss a thing when I check
in on it again next summer.

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

On 23 Sep 2003 04:28:36 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...

On 22 Sep 2003 06:37:30 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...

On 19 Sep 2003 03:46:28 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...

On 18 Sep 2003 04:19:29 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...

On 17 Sep 2003 04:20:35 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...

On 16 Sep 2003 06:21:21 -0700,
(basskisser) wrote:


(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message

In this case, what matters is whether you can be guilty of neglect and
guilty of more than neglect at the same time. If someone claims they
were guilty of neglect and then also claims they were guilty of more
than neglect, that does not in any way mean they were lying when they
claimed they were guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere I've
said that I was NOT guilty of neglect. THAT is what's necessary for you
to be correct in saying I was lying. If you can't do that (and you
haven't yet) then you owe me an apology.

Then why did you say this:

Ah, so here we have more proof that you think "neglect" means the same

thing at "forgot". I'll be nice to you today and teach you something...
Hint, they don't mean the same thing. In fact, they aren't even
related.

You don't have a point, do you. One has nothing to do with the other.
Forget and neglect don't mean the same thing. So what. That has
nothing to do with the fact that someone can be guilty of neglect and
more than neglect at the same time. You have yet to show anywhere that
I said I wasn't guilty of neglect. You have yet to show anywhere that I
lied long after you said you could. You still owe me an apology.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, you twit. I said you were a liar.
Why? Because you stated that you were "guilty of neglect". Then, when
I said something about it, you retorted with you simply forgot. And,

And that's where you're wrong. I NEVER said I simply forgot. More
proof that you're not smart enough to follow a simple conversation and
make up strawmen for you to argue against. Or is it your drunken stupor
causing you to imagine I said things that I never did?


as you have pointed out FOR me, "one has nothing to do with the
other". So, alas, you ARE a liar. Now, which one WAS the lie? Was it
the part where you said that you WERE guilty of neglect, or the part
where you said you "simply forgot"? Remember, now, you've just stated
AGAIN, they are two entirely different things.

First you have to show where I said I "simply forgot" to change it. If
you can't do that, then you defintely owe me an apology for calling me a
liar.

You idiot, you really DON'T get it, do you? I am VERY surprised, I had
given you way too much credit in my mind. I honestly thought you had
at least SOME sense, but alas, I see that is not true, you are dumber
than a chimp!!!

From the above, it's obvious that you can't show where I said I "simply
forgot" because if you could, you would have. Now you finally realize
in that shriveled vestigial brain of yours that you were wrong when you
called me a liar. But you're to much of a wimp to admit it. So instead
you write the meaningless crap above. What a dumb wimp you are.

Again, punk, if I'm such a "wimp", let's meet up. We can put your
Karate experience to the test, okay?

Well, at least you realize you're to stupid to engage verbally. And to
much of a baby to apologize when you know you should.

I guess you may have a point. I'm not intelligent enough to teach
someone as narrow minded as you, and as stupid as you. It's akin to
trying to teach plankton to recite the Gettysburg Address, utterly
impossible.

You, TEACH?? That's a good joke. First you have to be able to learn
something in order to teach it. And you have shown you are utterly
incapable of learning.


This shows just how much you DON'T know. Let's see, I teach three
Karate classes a week. I assist one of my fellow engineers, who



Your students should get a refund based on what you've said here.


teaches civil design courses at a local community college a few times



Probably because you don't know enough about it to teach the course
yourself.


a month. I work with my daughter EVERY evening, she's a straight "A"
student.



We already know your daughter is smarter than you.

You obviously can't teach anything about engine design since you can't
even answer very simple questions about it. Examples: Do you think NONE
of the oil vapor that leaves the crankcase and gets routed to the intake
via the PCV valve and breather actually makes it to the intake? And if
you think some of it does make it to the intake, do you think NONE of it
gets burned?

You obviously can't teach honesty since you've been caught in a blatent
lie twice. Examples: Walt - the guy who claims not to read a 2 line
post before responding to it when the response is keyed to the post.

You obviously can't teach english since you don't know the meaning of
simple words. Example: neglect.

You obviously can't teach simple set theory. Example: you don't know
the meaning of subset and superset because don't think it's possible for
someone to be guilty of neglect and more than neglect at the same time.

You obviously can't teach even a rudimentary fluid dynamics course.
Example: you think the pressure at the top of a compressor's piston is
the same as in the tank when the compressor is filling the tank.

I could go on and on, but I'll stop for now.

Steve




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com