|
|
Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Posted:
Apr 17, 2011 3:41 AM
|
|
On Apr 17, 5:30 pm, Alex <n...@leng.id.au> wrote:
> In aus.tv Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 17, 4:39 pm, Alex <n...@leng.id.au> wrote:
> >> In aus.tv Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Apr 17, 4:05 pm, Alex <n...@leng.id.au> wrote:
> >> >> In aus.tv Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> > [Alex] LOOK IT UP CLAIM DISPROVEN SO THERE
>
> >> >> >> If you can master Google Groups and try some more scroll click scroll,
> >> >> >> you could look at the proof already posted in this thread.
>
> >> >> > [Alex] LOOK IT UP CLAIM DISPROVEN SO THERE
>
> >> >> OK Graham, one more time for the dummy...
>
> >> >> Your original claim *in it's entirety* :
>
> >> >>http://groups.google.com/group/aus.tv/msg/f5be4541af273215?hl=en&dmod...
>
> >> >> >> None of you can harm me. None of you can correct me! I am always
> >> >> >> right every single post. None of you have even corrected my spelling
> >> >> >> in 10 years.
>
> >> >> >> Here you go!www.groups.google.com
>
> >> >> >> Find one of my posts with a spelling error, there should be about
> >> >> >> 3,000 - 5,000 of them.
>
> >> >> >> Then find any post that corrected me just once!
>
> >> >> The correction to (one) of your many spelling/grammatical errors as per
> >> >> your request:
>
> >> >>http://groups.google.com/group/aus.tv/msg/ff9074e935049893?hl=en&dmod...
>
> >> >> > In aus.tv Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Alex <n...@leng.id.au> wrote:
> >> >> >> Look you idiot, if you correct me you will faulter yourself.
>
> >> >> >You mean "falter", don't you genius?
>
> >> >> Disprove your own claim, Graham. It's *your* credibility (ahem) at
> >> >> stake, so you'll have to demonstrate more honesty, logic and
> >> >> coherent thought than you usually manage when bailing on one
> >> >> of your failed "para-tests"...
>
> >> > Ew got me there!
>
> >> I misjudged you. I really didn't think you'd have the dignity to
> >> concede...
>
> > By all means, whenever I post claims about my incorrectibility as a
> > side effect of my immortality field, feel free to post your disproof!
>
> Why - wasn't the last round enough for you? Or are you going to
> completely flip out this time and actually follow through on your
> threats, Graham?
>
> > Here's your proof where you spelt "falter" correctly!
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/DISPROOF-OF-IMMORTALITY-FIELD
>
> Yes, and for those of us with comprehension skills *beyond* 2nd-grade
> level, you'd notice it was thoughtfully copied and pasted in the
> response *you already quoted* . But you really are just *that*
> stupid...
>
> > BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
> Indeed.
>
> I see you've made your usual "para-test" attempt at avoiding
> inconvenient facts which don't fit your delusion.
>
> Graham Cooper's credibility: nil. No "immortality field" for
> you!
>
> Alex.
>
Hey Alex, what about this post where, as predicted by my claim,
YOU FUCKED UP
while trying to correct me?
----8<--------------------------------
>> > Your stats is not even high school level Bruce, I did several 2nd
>> > years stats subjects at UNI.
>> Your grammar is not even preschool level Graham. It's "your stats *are*
>> not..."
> Actually, it's not. Graham is referring to statistics as a single
> field of endeavour, rather than two or more data points.
Yeah, I can concede that. That only leaves the one error in Graham's
otherwise infallible post. :-)
Alex.
-------------------------8<--------
|
|
