🚀 go-pugleaf

"Double-A" <double-aa@hush.ai> wrote in message
news:1156950293.649164.187020@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> 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
>
How awful!  Those brutes!

C.H.J.