From owner-biophys@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Tue May 1 03:22:25 2001 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDD4A17B8C for ; Tue, 1 May 2001 03:22:23 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB98417B8B for ; Tue, 1 May 2001 03:22:18 +0100 (BST) Received: from niobium.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (niobium [193.62.192.41]) by mercury.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194D417B8E for ; Tue, 1 May 2001 03:22:11 +0100 (BST) Received: (from news@localhost) by niobium.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.8.8) id DAA18851 for biophys-list@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk; Tue, 1 May 2001 03:22:10 +0100 (BST) X-Authentication-Warning: niobium.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk: news set sender to using -f From: Jeff Thompson X-Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism,alt.astronomy,alt.atheism,alt.athiesm,alt.sci.natural.phenomena.unusual,alt.sci.physics,alt.talk.creationism,bionet.biophysics,harvard.course.physics11a.q-a,sci.bio.paleontology,sci.geo.geology,sci.physics,talk.atheism Subject: Re: The "Science" of John Boatwright Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:24:32 -0400 Organization: ABC DataKAP Lines: 42 Message-ID: <3AEE1E60.9C83599C@123jeff.com> References: <3ae7e476_2@news01.one.net.au> <3AEA0723.5EFFC08D@123jeff.com> <3AEA1617.C53B662B@mediaone.net> <3AEAE399.281C2E08@123jeff.com> <3AEB1E89.B89A0E6E@mediaone.net> Reply-To: Remove@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk, the@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk, SPAM@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk, from@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk, jeff@SPAM123jeff.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: biophys@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Sender: owner-biophys@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk Precedence: bulk OK, one last shot, just to prove I can waste bandwidth as well as those who need their medication dosages raised a tad more. George, I hold a PhD in Engineering science, a BS in EE/ Mathematics plus a JD (that's a Juris Doctoris, or Doctor of Law degree, George). I suspect that I can parse _any_ mathematical thesis you care to present, and I can criticize your logic (or lack thereof) with ease. That is, with ease, once I figured out that there really were not large, missing swatches of text in your rantings, that you really were trotting this amazingly jejune foolishness in its entirety out for the edification of the troops. At first, you see, I took it for an elaborate, hugely tongue-in-cheek joke. Imagine my surprise when I found out that you actually _were_ foaming at the mouth about this stuff! Now, to cases: You can posit any argument you wish and derive any conclusion therefrom as long as you create a consistent framework within which to argue. Your creation of a different algebra than the rest of us are accustomed to using allows you to essentially 'prove' that two plus two really does equal five (for very large values of two). Heck, boy, where did you get that MS degree anyway, the University of Close Cover Before Striking? Sayonara, fool... Jeff Thompson George Hammond wrote: > SNIP > > [Hammond] > Please don't eat up valuable bandwidth with Sunday School > level discussion. If you are academically unqualifed > to discuss science, please retire fom the thread. The > title of the thread indicates it is about "science", > not Sunday School or High School Logic lectures that everybody > has heard a bazillion times. Please allow people of actual > educational accomplishemnt to speak, IWO please shut up > because you are boring the shit out of everybody. .