Re: Solution to the energy shortage?

Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:isudnTB20faUb4rVnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:bqSdnWku5fpqdIrVnZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>>> news:qumdnd0mur2pe4rVnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>>>> "Ben Goren" <ben@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>>>>> news:1209523445_1031@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> Hamlet's Life moaned:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I do not need to address any of your questions.
>>>>>>>> O<BITCHSLAP>
>>>>>>> HTH
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Translation:  RUN AWAY!  RUN AWAY!
>>>>> "Godel was wrong."
>>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> asserting that it is he who
>>>>> was "one of the most significant logicians of all time", and had
>>>>> an "immense impact upon scientific and philosophical thinking in the
>>>>> 20th century", not Kurt Gödel.
>>>>> news:qumdnaImur0KeIrVnZ2dnUVZ_vOd
>>>>>
>>>> Can you show where I claim either of those quotes you say I'm
asserting?
>>>
>>> The quoted text is a paraphrase of the extrapolated implications of
your 
>>> mad assertion that "Godel was wrong."
>> "...in this case" is the context you're missing.
>>
>>> Proving yourself to be a total, illogical fuckwit by making assertions
in 
>>> the complete absence of any consideration whatsoever for the
consequences 
>>> is all you have done in these threads. You have done nothing else.
>> Except show that the axioms provided in the argument are not
sufficiently 
>> self-evident and are, therefore, not true axioms.
>>
>>> Does it come as a surprise to you that you are bitchslapped for that
yet 
>>> again? Hmmm?
>> By you?  I'm not worried about being bitchslapped by you.  You're a 
>> small-minded plagiarist who doesn't even know what he posts.  No, I'm
not 
>> really worried about what you think of me.
> 
> The work was credited immediately before it was pasted. If plagiarism
were 
> involved it would have been immediately drawn to my attention by my auk 
> colleagues, for they shall not tolerate such perfidy. I do not see
anyone 
> other than you and the BAAWAAAAAAAWAAAAAAH Knight of fuckwittery pushing

> that particular barrow.

It should've been credited at the time of posting.
> 
>> I doubt anyone else cares what you think, either.
> 
> Note how you are attempting to minimise potential impact to yourself?
Hmmm?

Not at all.

> 
>>> Stiff shit for you. Enjoy your ignominy, retard.
>>>
>> Do you imagine that I have ignominy in alt.atheism (from which I post
and 
>> read this)?  Or is it you that has that?  I can cobble together a poll
of 
>> likely posters,
> 
> Note how you are attempting to maximise potential support for yourself? 
> Hmmm?
> 
> Tell me again how not worried you are.

None.

> 
>> if you wish.
> 
> How about you post a list of names of likely posters first?
> 

How worried are you?