brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Shadow Dancer insomniac at winterslight.org
Tue Jul 23 20:03:14 EST 2002


"Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:ahk14h$ib0$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> In article  "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> writes:
> <
> <
> <"Jet" <thatjetnospam at yahoo.com> wrote in message
> <news:3D3A5859.B7212C46 at yahoo.com...
> <>
>     {...}
> <>
> <>
> <> What do you have to say about the fact you can't answer any of the
> <> questions you took girls to task for not being able to answer?
> <>
> <> Here's a really simple one:
> <> http://christianparty.net/timssh04.htm
> <>
> <> Brian got it wrong, he thought the objects started out at the same
> <> height and you don't have a clue.
> <>
> <> J
> <
> <What kind of a moron could you possibly be to presume that the person who
> <supplied the test scores and the original problems and the test answers
in
> <the first place "can't answer any of the questions"?
> <
> <This is called "negative knowledge".  You have all the data and evidence
you
> <need to answer the question correctly, but you instead get the *wrong*
> <answer, even when you've quoted some of the data and evidence yourself.
> <
> <For example, you also presumed that .25x = .30, you acknowledged that
this
> <would make x = 1.2, you admitted that you knew that x = .92 and not 1.2,
and
> <you STILL couldn't get the correct answer, and instead wrote:  "Sorry,
dumb
> <ass, I scored in the top 2% on the GRE math test. And I can answer H04".
> <
> <Please tell us how this statement is going to help you solve this simple
> <problem, which STILL isn't even as complicated as an algebra, addition or
> <subtraction, or multiplication or division problem?  You haven't even
> <advanced to that stage yet, and here you are LYING about your test
scores,
> <as if though you "think" this has something to do with solving the
problem!
> <It has utterly nothing to do with it.
> <
> <Is it your debate tactic to LIE about your test scores so that your flock
of
> <feminazis will just take your word for it, hope that they'll just go
along
> <with your program--and keep them ignorant for the rest of their lives?
> <
> <The CORRECT answer is that x = 93 1/3%.  Why couldn't you even figure
this
> <out?  Why do you keep insisting that .25x = .30, when you were handed the
> <answer on a silver platter?
> <
> <What is it about your arrogance that, after a week of being unable to
solve
> <the problem, you were GIVEN all the proper details on a silver platter,
yet
> <you STILL can't solve for "x"?
> <
> <People need to know.  They need to understand what it is about feminazis
> <that they never seem to comprehend some of  the simplest points.  This
> <emotional grab bag of false feminazi claims has just got to come to an
end.
> <
> <John Knight
>
> Heh heh heh...
>
> Jet, when you've seen John in action as long as I, you'll realize
> you just won -- when he wanders about rambling about averages and
> feminazis and LYING and test scores and and putting hypothetical
> arguments orthoginal to anything you said into you mouth -- in other
> words, eight paragraphs of bush-beating which contains not a word
> of direct response to your two straightforward observations:
>
>    What do you have to say about the fact you can't answer any of the
>    questions you took girls to task for not being able to answer?
>
>    Here's a really simple one:
>    http://christianparty.net/timssh04.htm
>
>    Brian got it wrong, he thought the objects started out at the same
>    height and you don't have a clue.
>
>
> that he's evaded your challenge a dozen times now, and that Brian's
> reasoning was so far afield that it wasn't just "not right", it
> wasn't even wrong -- well then, you just took game, set, and match.
>
> By the way, my posts are getting dropped with dreary regularity, so
> allow me to append my critique of Brian's "proof", which did not
> make it to Google:

<math stuff snipped>

It is likely one of our nincompoops issuing cancels on posts.  They want
just their words to be heard, not the counter-arguments.  I've heard they
have done it before.  Maybe when they all combine their individual small
percentage of brain used, they come up with enough to think that far.

At least they aren't so lame as to subscribe you to sexual mailing lists.
Gee, makes one wonder how they'd know about them TO subscribe me to them.

I still advocate taking these bozos and putting them on an island all by
themselves.  That, apparently, is what would make them happy, since I doubt
the American public would put up with any serious consideration of a repeal
of civil rights laws.

The Shadow Dancer





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list