🚀 go-pugleaf

honestjohn wrote:
> "Double-A" <double-aa@hush.ai> wrote in message
> news:1156947206.158886.110470@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > mbbr@mighty.co.za wrote:
> > > Kookdancing queen, Dickless Davie tholen@antispam.ham the "irrelevaant"
> > > Ignoranus whined and tholed like the antagonistic arsehole that he is:
> > > > Greg Hennessy writes:
> > > >
> > > > >>>>>> Astronomers don't need a definition for "planet", and IMO
> creating one
> > > > >>>>>> was a big mistake.
> > > >
> > > > >>>>> How else are astronomers supposed to answer the question "how
> many
> > > > >>>>> planets are there in the solar system?" if we don't have a
> definition
> > > > >>>>> of what a planet is?
> > > >
> > > > >>>> That question comes from the public, not from astronomers.
> > > >
> > > > >>> You erroneously presuppose the question comes from the public, not
> > > > >>> astronomers.
> > > >
> > > > >> Not at all.
> > > >
> > > > > Yes at all. The question came from me, and I am an astronomer, so
> you
> > > > > were erroneous in your presupposition that the question comes from
> the
> > > > > public.
> > > >
> > > > You're the first astronomer I've encountered who can't answer the
> > > > question.
> > >
> > > Unlike your "lassic" evasions, eh, Dickless? A0L!!!
> > >
> > > > Too bad you're not in a position to answer that question
> > > > when the public asks it.
> > >
> > > Unlike you, eh, Dickless? You're noted for answering all the questions
> > > put to you.
> > >
> > > > >>> It is oxymoronic to assert that a definition isn't needed and that
> > > > >>> questions can be answered by using a definition.
> > > >
> > > > >> Irrelevant, given that no such assertion has been made.
> > > >
> > > > > Incorrrect.
> > > >
> > > > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
> > >
> > > On your part, Dickless.
> > >
> > > > > Check the text quoted above.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed, do so.  Nowhere does it say that a definition isn't needed.
> > >
> > > So you k'lame, Dickless.
> > >
> > > > > The assertion that a definition is not need has indeed been made.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect.
> > >
> > > "Irrelevaant".
> > >
> > > > > I don't know why you make such easily disproved claim.
> > > >
> > > > You're erroneously presupposing that the claim can be easily
> disproved.
> > >
> > > On your part, Dickless. Also non sequitur and rather ironic.
> >
> >
> > Why don't you find someone to pick on who is more at your own
> > intellecual level, Bruce, another kindergarten drop out like yourself?
> >
> >
> > Double-A
> >
> Like Art "the fart" Deco?
>
> C.H.J.


Those two were the perfect couple until AUK's official shunning of
Bruce doomed their relationship.

Double-A