Discussion:
Question for Pnal, Sergio, Ed Prochak, Lofty Goat. Oddball, and the others
(too old to reply)
Claudius Denk
2017-07-12 18:34:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
p***@gmail.com
2017-07-12 23:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?

You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.

Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
Serg io
2017-07-13 00:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
>

hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)

what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure, wet
steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.
benj
2017-07-13 00:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 7/12/2017 8:35 PM, Serg io wrote:
> On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of
>>> gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of
>>> H2O?
>>
>> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim?
>> Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>>
>> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it
>> has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling
>> point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon
>> a misunderstanding in your part.
>>
>
> hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)
>
> what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
> enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure, wet
> steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.

Your problem Sergio is you are using 'wet steam" tables when you need to
be using "dry steam" tables.
Serg io
2017-07-13 01:09:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 7/12/2017 7:43 PM, benj wrote:
> On 7/12/2017 8:35 PM, Serg io wrote:
>> On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>>>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of
>>>> gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure
>>>> of H2O?
>>>
>>> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim?
>>> Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>>>
>>> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint:
>>> it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the
>>> boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is
>>> based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
>>>
>>
>> hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)
>>
>> what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
>> enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure,
>> wet steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.
>
> Your problem Sergio is you are using 'wet steam" tables when you need to
> be using "dry steam" tables.

sh*t. Oh well, nobody told me, what about 'damp steam', or 'moist
steam' ?

If my glasses steam up, am I all wet ?
Guess it depends upon which table I'm at.
If I order steamed clams, would they be wet or dry at the table ?

See that steam cleaner on TV, is it spreading enthalpy all over the
place? Or entropy ?
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 04:46:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 5:35:25 PM UTC-7, Serg io wrote:
> On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> > You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
> >
> > Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
> >
>
> hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)
>
> what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
> enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure, wet
> steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.

I think we learn more about what people really think from the questions they refuse to answer than we do from those they do answer.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 06:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 5:35:25 PM UTC-7, Serg io wrote:
> On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> > You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
> >
> > Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
> >
>
> hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)
>
> what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
> enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure, wet
> steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.

LOL. So, let me get this straight, McGinn told you that he doesn't believe in these? Where?

Provide a reference you dishonest coward.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 16:26:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 5:35:25 PM UTC-7, Serg io wrote:
> On 7/12/2017 6:38 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> > You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
> >
> > Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
> >
>
> hey Denk/McGinn et al, (I have him plonked)
>
> what are "steam tables" used for ? they are used with are used with
> enthalpy, latent heat, specific entropy, dryness fraction, pressure, wet
> steam, lighter than air, density, all things you do not believe in.

Gee golly. Trolls are the gift that keeps on giving.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 04:46:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.


I think we learn more about what people really think from the questions they refuse to answer than we do from those they do answer.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 06:07:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.

What do you think it indicates that you won't answer this question?

CD
James McGinn
2017-07-13 07:13:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:07:23 PM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> > You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
> >
> > Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.
>
> What do you think it indicates that you won't answer this question?
>
> CD

I guess these trolls think that if they don't answer questions they can keep on believing.
James McGinn
2017-07-13 07:10:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.

You reveal yourself as a fraud for not answering that question.

You are just a fucking gullible science groupie.

Stay out of science forums, you fucking troll.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 15:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.


Don't look now, but your desperation is showing.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-13 16:27:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.
>
> Go ahead, explain what steam tables are used for, if you can. Hint: it has nothing to do with water in its gaseous state below the boiling point of water, nothing at all... you entire hypothesis is based upon a misunderstanding in your part.

uh, so, let me get this straight. Steam has nothing to do with, uh, steam?

Maybe you should read what you wrote before you hit that send key.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-16 15:27:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 4:38:56 PM UTC-7, ***@gmail.com wrote:

> > Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> You don't really know what steam tables are used for, do you, Jim? Clearly, it is not what you think it is.

Answer the question you fucking evasive jackass.
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller
2017-07-13 02:41:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 1:34:20 PM UTC-5, Claudius Denk wrote:
> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?

You need to stop eating so many Steamed Foreskins from the Steam tables at the Buffet
Lofty Goat
2017-07-14 19:22:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:34:15 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?

Steam tables?

Before I can answer that I have to ask you: why are you talking about
cafeteria equipment?

Oh, and boiling point?

I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
physical chemistry.

Why even bring it up?

I won't spend a lot of effort sharpening my tongue on your thick hide as
do so many in this newsgroup, but it's worth noting that you make less
and less sense with each passing day.

Why persist?

--
Goat
Claudius Denk
2017-07-14 19:44:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:34:15 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> Steam tables?
>
> Before I can answer that I have to ask you: why are you talking about
> cafeteria equipment?
>
> Oh, and boiling point?
>
> I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> physical chemistry.

Really?

Can you tell us why, or is that your own special secret?
James McGinn
2017-07-14 20:08:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:44:20 PM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:34:15 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
> > <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> > Steam tables?
> >
> > Before I can answer that I have to ask you: why are you talking about
> > cafeteria equipment?
> >
> > Oh, and boiling point?
> >
> > I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> > Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> > physical chemistry.
>
> Really?
>
> Can you tell us why, or is that your own special secret?

Believers will never attempt to explain what they are pretending to understand.

Science groupies may be the most dishonest people in existence.
James McGinn
2017-07-14 20:36:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:

> I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> physical chemistry.

Really? Are you new to science?
Claudius Denk
2017-07-15 19:31:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:36:06 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
>
> > I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> > Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> > physical chemistry.
>
> Really? Are you new to science?

I knew none of these trolls would answer this question.

Trolls never provide details. All they know how to do is whine.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-15 19:33:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:

> Oh, and boiling point?
>
> I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> physical chemistry.

Uh, er.

Uh . . . ?

Can you explain the steps that brought you to this conclusion. How is it relevant to the subject at hand. Be specific, you vague nitwit.
The Starmaker
2017-07-15 22:45:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
>
> > Oh, and boiling point?
> >
> > I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> > Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> > physical chemistry.
>
> Uh, er.
>
> Uh . . . ?
>
> Can you explain the steps that brought you to this conclusion. How is it relevant to the subject at hand. Be specific, you vague nitwit.


nitwit??? you're geting...testy.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-15 23:40:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 3:46:00 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> >
> > > Oh, and boiling point?
> > >
> > > I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> > > Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> > > physical chemistry.
> >
> > Uh, er.
> >
> > Uh . . . ?
> >
> > Can you explain the steps that brought you to this conclusion. How is it relevant to the subject at hand. Be specific, you vague nitwit.
>
>
> nitwit??? you're geting...testy.

You got nothing.
James McGinn
2017-07-16 16:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 3:46:00 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> >
> > > Oh, and boiling point?
> > >
> > > I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> > > Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> > > physical chemistry.
> >
> > Uh, er.
> >
> > Uh . . . ?
> >
> > Can you explain the steps that brought you to this conclusion. How is it relevant to the subject at hand. Be specific, you vague nitwit.
>
>
> nitwit??? you're geting...testy.

Address the issue in the subject heading, you fucking troll.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-16 18:40:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:22:26 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:34:15 -0700 (PDT), Claudius Denk
> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
> Steam tables?
>
> Before I can answer that I have to ask you: why are you talking about
> cafeteria equipment?
>
> Oh, and boiling point?
>
> I made a point about the term "boiling point" in an earlier post.
> Briefly, it is of little or no significance in thermodynamics or
> physical chemistry.
>
> Why even bring it up?
>
> I won't spend a lot of effort sharpening my tongue on your thick hide as
> do so many in this newsgroup, but it's worth noting that you make less
> and less sense with each passing day.
>
> Why persist?
>
> --
> Goat

Answer the question, you fucking troll.
Claudius Denk
2017-07-16 15:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?

I knew these phonies wouldn't answer the question. Science is their religion. They see themselves as defenders of truth. Just like religious people.
James McGinn
2017-09-24 20:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-24 20:05:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous
>> H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>
>

No

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
James McGinn
2017-09-24 20:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 1:05:43 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous
> >> H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
> >
> >
>
> No

Desperate liar.
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-24 20:58:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 1:05:43 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>>>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous
>>>> H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No
>
> Desperate liar.
>

I’m not lying.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Serg io
2017-09-25 00:11:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/24/2017 3:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 1:05:43 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:34:20 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>>>>> Do you agree that the steam tables do not show the existence of gaseous
>>>>> H2O at temperatures below the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No
>>
>> Desperate liar.
>>
>
> I’m not lying.
>


James McGinn ... criminal outhouse Vandal

https://i.imgflip.com/1rsr2t.jpg


that is the one and only "James McGinn AND Claudious Dink" alright, they
share the same brain space, one is more submissive than the other, the
2 feuding personalities devised some sort of Stalemate to prevent "Fatal
Cognitive Dissonance" The Enemy of your Enemy is your Friend
Multiple Subservient Personalities (MSP)

James is the same dude does those you tube videos holding up hand drawn
mickey mouse heads and driviling incoherently for hours and hours about
"steamed fables".


the one comment he has is by " Jeremy Wang 7 months ago:
"Do not listen to this person unless you want to become stupider."
James McGinn
2017-09-25 01:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Prove it.
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-25 02:51:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> Prove it.
>

Don’t owe that to you.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
James McGinn
2017-09-25 03:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Prove it.
> >
>
> Don’t owe that to you.
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

You got nothing!!!
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-25 12:48:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Prove it.
>>>
>>
>> Don’t owe that to you.
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> You got nothing!!!
>

And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Claudius Denk
2017-09-25 13:26:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Prove it.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Don’t owe that to you.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >
> > You got nothing!!!
> >
>
> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.

Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-25 17:26:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Prove it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don’t owe that to you.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>
>>> You got nothing!!!
>>>
>>
>> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
>
> Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
>

Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Serg io
2017-09-25 18:01:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 9/25/2017 12:26 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Prove it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Don’t owe that to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>
>>>> You got nothing!!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
>>
>> Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
>>
>
> Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
> alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
> because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.
>


McGinn's Law:
"Non-Believers only discuss the things they non-believe in."
James McGinn
2017-09-30 06:59:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Prove it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Don’t owe that to you.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >>>
> >>> You got nothing!!!
> >>>
> >>
> >> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
> >
> > Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
> >
>
> Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
> alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
> because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Hmm. Well, if they only consider alternatives from people they agree with that would explain a lot, wouldn't it.

Belief is a river. Once you get in the flow it is not easy to get out.

Lastly, there is no gaseous H2O at ambient temperatures, you morons.
Odd Bodkin
2017-09-30 20:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Prove it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don’t owe that to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>
>>>>> You got nothing!!!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
>>>
>>> Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
>>>
>>
>> Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
>> alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
>> because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Hmm. Well, if they only consider alternatives from people they agree
> with that would explain a lot, wouldn't it.
>
> Belief is a river. Once you get in the flow it is not easy to get out.

And if the guy calling you out of the river is standing in a pile of shit,
maybe best to float on by.
I know you’d like company in your pile of shit, if only to wrestle in it,
but no thanks.

>
> Lastly, there is no gaseous H2O at ambient temperatures, you morons.
>



--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
James McGinn
2017-10-01 17:43:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 1:08:06 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Prove it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Don’t owe that to you.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You got nothing!!!
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
> >>>
> >>> Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
> >> alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
> >> because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >
> > Hmm. Well, if they only consider alternatives from people they agree
> > with that would explain a lot, wouldn't it.
> >
> > Belief is a river. Once you get in the flow it is not easy to get out.
>
> And if the guy calling you out of the river is standing in a pile of shit,
> maybe best to float on by.
> I know you’d like company in your pile of shit, if only to wrestle in it,
> but no thanks.
>
> >
> > Lastly, there is no gaseous H2O at ambient temperatures, you morons.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

People want to believe what is simple. When simple beliefs are shown to be false people experience cognitive dissonance. That makes them act like children who need their diapers changed.
Odd Bodkin
2017-10-01 20:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 1:08:06 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 10:26:18 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> Claudius Denk <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:48:31 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Prove it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don’t owe that to you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You got nothing!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that little mantra is all you’ve got, Chief Broom.
>>>>>
>>>>> Believers only discuss the things they believe in.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, it’s true they are not likely to discuss alternatives if the
>>>> alternative is coming from an incompetent nut job who only disbelieves
>>>> because he thinks that’s a positive attribute.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>
>>> Hmm. Well, if they only consider alternatives from people they agree
>>> with that would explain a lot, wouldn't it.
>>>
>>> Belief is a river. Once you get in the flow it is not easy to get out.
>>
>> And if the guy calling you out of the river is standing in a pile of shit,
>> maybe best to float on by.
>> I know you’d like company in your pile of shit, if only to wrestle in it,
>> but no thanks.
>>
>>>
>>> Lastly, there is no gaseous H2O at ambient temperatures, you morons.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> People want to believe what is simple. When simple beliefs are shown to
> be false people experience cognitive dissonance. That makes them act like
> children who need their diapers changed.
>

This is a clear expression of the pile of shit you’re standing in.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
James McGinn
2017-10-02 06:53:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Prove it.
> >
>
> Don’t owe that to you.
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

You got nothing!!!
Claudius Denk
2018-03-12 21:59:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 11:53:29 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 7:51:10 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > James McGinn <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Prove it.
> > >
> >
> > Don’t owe that to you.
> >
> > --
> > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> You got nothing!!!
Loading...