brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight johnknight at usa.com
Thu Jul 25 12:41:03 EST 2002


"Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
news:ahomc2$u3n0v$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...
> "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
> news:tiM%8.18437$Fq6.2292048 at news2.west.cox.net...
> >
> > "Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> > news:ahjvvu$hn7$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> > > In article <Qe6%8.3022$dk1.600133 at news20.bellglobal.com> "Parse Tree"
> > <parsetree at hotmail.com> writes:
> > > <"Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
> > > <news:ahiq14$tivr6$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...
> > > <> "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > <> news:T0%_8.7970$sb5.425448 at news20.bellglobal.com...
> > > <> > "Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> > > <> > news:ahhgoj$6i8$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> > > <> > > In article <3D390E51.8888A0FA at yahoo.com> Jet
> > <thatjetnospam at yahoo.com>
> > > <> > writes:
> > > <> > > <
> > > <> > > <
> > > <> > > <
> > > <> > > <Thalamus wrote:
> > > <> > >
> > > <> > > I'm guessing he's just a kid -- isn't he exactly like a three
> year
> > > <> > > old who has just learned "kaka" and goes around delightedly
> > kaka-ing
> > > <> > > everyone and everything ("kaka-head") he encounters?  His
> "insults"
> > > <lack
> > > <> > any
> > > <> > > semblence of style, originality, deftness, or wit.  He's purely
> > > <> > > of the THUNK! school of insult.
> > > <> > >
> > > <> > > I'm guessing thirteen.  Do I hear twelve?
> > > <> >
> > > <> > Hey!!  That's rather rude.
> > > <> >
> > > <>
> > > <> No it isn't, not in Thalamus' case.  It is likely the truth.
> > > <
> > > <I do not like the implication that stupid = young.
> > > <
> > > <Ageism of this sort is no different than calling someone 'nigger' or
> > 'spic'.
> > > <Actually, it's quite worse because it's associating an actual
negative
> > > <property, rather than simply a negative connotation.
> > > <
> > > <
> > >
> > > Well, allow me to be more precise then: it is most certainly not
> > > the case that all young people are immature and incompletely
> > > formed, many young people never cease to startle you with
> > > their precocity -- but on the other hand it is true that
> > > the a large fraction of the larvally immature are young.
> > > I mean, if someone on the net calls you a poo-poo face, what
> > > would your guess be?  Brian is pretty much competing in that
> > > category.
> > >
> > >
> > > -- cary
> >
> > Your powers of observation SUCK.  All of you.
> >
> > Brian is a Norwegian, and English is his second language.  Just because
> he's
> > not familiar with all the colloquialisms you know doesn't mean he's
young
> or
> > immature.  You knew that, but never figured it out.  Why not?
> >
> > If you keep on "analyzing" Brian, you'll undoubtedly confuse yourselves
so
> > much that you can't ever recover (which seems to be the ordinary state
for
> > feminazis, eh?).
> >
> > John Knight
>
> All we have to say about Brian is that (1) he is not a U.S. citizen, and
(2)
> is likely below the age of adulthood, namely, 18.  On the latter, even if
he
> is not, he exhibits the name-calling attitude of a minor.
>
> So do you, so how old are you?  Rallying against your mommy, aren't you,
> John?  What, did she punish you for degrading girls?  As well she should
> correct you, it isn't right.
>
> Every time one of us provides evidence you cannot refute, you resort to
> calling us niggers, whiggers, jews, stupid, and dumb.  While you're
pointing
> your index finger at us, THREE fingers are pointing back at YOU.
>
> The Shadow Dancer
>
>

Just like with the physics questions (the more you girls discuss it, the
STUPIDER you get--read: the negative knowledge increases geometrically),
you're doing exactly the same thing with your "analysis" above.

Many of us used to believe that feminazis did this so often on purpose, just
in order to be inflammatory, but you've made it abundantly clear that you're
truly incapable of the most basic analysis.

What's really funny is that you can't even comprehend the simplest points
even after they've been pointed out to you a dozen times.  The key to the
answer to H04 was posted weeks ago, several MEN have posted the correct
answer, and you feminazis are still spinning around in left field hoping you
can change physics to fit your "women's intuition".  Your errors above have
been corrected thousands of times on the usenet, and you keep making the
same silly mistakes.  The notion that you can understand men is even more
absurd than the notion that you can ever understand physics (except that
you'd probably score even lower on a "TIMSS  Men" test than you did on the
TIMSS Math test--where you scored lower than if you'd just guessed on ONE
THIRD of the questions).

Is it even possible to score lower than that?  Yes, it is.

John Knight







More information about the Neur-sci mailing list