A 250 pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be
pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force,
instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing him to a
quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu,
Jewish or Buddhist
each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been
left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu,
Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378 million
(according to the population reference bureau). At an average (census)
rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump
down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining presents
under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up
the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept
for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78
miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650
miles per second -- 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves
at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming
that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two
pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousands tons, not counting
Santa himself. On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than
300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer can pull 10 times
the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of them
-- Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload, not
counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch).
600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance -- this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer
would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each. In
short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake.
The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing
him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â inPhysics schmisics.
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this
reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378
million (according to the population reference bureau). At an average
(census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million
homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out,
jump down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining
presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him,
get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next
house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will
accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about
0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not
counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving
at 650 miles per second -- 3,000 times the speed of sound. For
purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses
space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional
reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming
that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two
pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousands tons, not counting
Santa himself. On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than
300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer can pull 10 times
the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of
them -- Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload,
not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly
seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the
monarch).
600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air
resistance -- this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a
spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of
reindeer would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second
each. In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously,
exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms
in their wake. The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26
thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the
fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to
acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by
4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and
reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
No conventional physics apply to him as he (and the sleigh and the
reindeer) are magic.
Physics schmisics.
No conventional physics apply to him as he (and the sleigh and the
reindeer) are magic.
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu,
Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378 million
(according to the population reference bureau). At an average (census)
rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump
down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining presents
under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up
the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept
for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78
miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650
miles per second
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing
him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
On 23/12/2023 12:15, soup wrote:
Physics schmisics.
No conventional physics apply to him as he (and the sleigh and the
reindeer) are magic.
Of course, Santa can travel faster than light. Isn't it something to do
with the Theory of Relnativity?
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu,
Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378 million
(according to the population reference bureau). At an average (census)
rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump
down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining presents
under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up
the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept
for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78
miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving at 650
miles per second -- 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves
at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming
that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two
pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousands tons, not counting
Santa himself. On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than
300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer can pull 10 times
the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of them
-- Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload, not
counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch).
600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance -- this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer
would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each. In
short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake.
The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing
him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than
the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have
to go faster than the speed of light.....
Plus how does he get up and down all those chimneys, he'd get stuck.
Plus not ever house has a chimney...... How does he effect entry to
every dwellign without breaking the door or window down?
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this
reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378
million (according to the population reference bureau). At an average
(census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million
homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out,
jump down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining
presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him,
get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next
house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will
accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about
0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not
counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving
at 650 miles per second -- 3,000 times the speed of sound. For
purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses
space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional
reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming
that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two
pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousands tons, not counting
Santa himself. On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than
300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer can pull 10 times
the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of
them -- Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload,
not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly
seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the
monarch).
600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air
resistance -- this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a
spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of
reindeer would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second
each. In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously,
exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms
in their wake. The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26
thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the
fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to
acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by
4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and
reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than
the speed of light
.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have
to go faster than the speed of light.....
Plus how does he get up and down all those chimneys, he'd get stuck.
Plus not ever house has a chimney...... How does he effect entry to
every dwellign without breaking the door or window down?
On 2023-12-23, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than
the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have
to go faster than the speed of light.....
It doesn't need to go faster than the speed of light, the sleigh just
travels to each house simultaneously under the many-worlds intepretation
of quantum mechanics.
On 2023-12-23, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than
the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have
to go faster than the speed of light.....
It doesn't need to go faster than the speed of light, the sleigh just
travels to each house simultaneously under the many-worlds
intepretation of quantum mechanics.
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this
reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378
million (according to the population reference bureau). At an average
(census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that comes to 108 million
homes, presuming there is at least one good child in each.
Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the
different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to
west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child,
Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out,
jump down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining
presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him,
get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next
house.
Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed
around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will
accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about
0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not
counting bathroom stops or breaks. This means Santa's sleigh is moving
at 650 miles per second -- 3,000 times the speed of sound. For
purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses
space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional
reindeer can run (at best) 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming
that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized Lego set (two
pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousands tons, not counting
Santa himself. On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than
300 pounds. Even granting that the "flying" reindeer can pull 10 times
the normal amount, the job can't be done with eight or even nine of
them -- Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload,
not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly
seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the
monarch).
600,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air
resistance -- this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a
spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of
reindeer would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second
each. In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously,
exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms
in their wake. The entire reindeer team would be vaporized within 4.26
thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the
fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating
from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to
acceleration forces of 17,000 G's. A 250 pound Santa (which seems
ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by
4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and
reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he's dead now.
Merry Christmas
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than
the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have
to go faster than the speed of light.....
Plus how does he get up and down all those chimneys, he'd get stuck.
Plus not ever house has a chimney...... How does he effect entry to
every dwellign without breaking the door or window down?
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) Â in
the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim,
Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
So, it seems good luck isn't difficult to come by.
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message news:slrnuoe8dr.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2023-12-23, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than >>> the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have >>> to go faster than the speed of light.....
It doesn't need to go faster than the speed of light, the sleigh just
travels to each house simultaneously under the many-worlds
intepretation of quantum mechanics.
But if you have only the one sleigh, and say a million and one
different houses he is going to visit simultaneously, in a million
and one possible worlds, doesn't that still leave the children in
the million houses in those million and one possible worlds which
he didn't visit, without any presents ?
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)  in >>>>> the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, >>>>> Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)  in >>>>> the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, >>>>> Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
On 2023-12-23, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)  in >>>>>> the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, >>>>>> Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
If you're asking ChatGPT then I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few
sayings are attributed to people who never actually existed.
There's a concept of abandonware, which seems to work okay in practice, although it's obviously on shaky legal foundations.
On 23/12/2023 19:01, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)
 in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of
Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
And many, many more are attributed to those who did.
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you? It's
very much his style.
On 2023-12-23, billy bookcase <billy@anon.com> wrote:
"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote in message
news:slrnuoe8dr.5oa.jon+usenet@raven.unequivocal.eu...
On 2023-12-23, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
not only that, you're forgetting Einstein.... Nothing can go faster than >>>> the speed of light.... to do all those delvieries, The Sleigh would have >>>> to go faster than the speed of light.....
It doesn't need to go faster than the speed of light, the sleigh just
travels to each house simultaneously under the many-worlds
intepretation of quantum mechanics.
But if you have only the one sleigh, and say a million and one
different houses he is going to visit simultaneously, in a million
and one possible worlds, doesn't that still leave the children in
the million houses in those million and one possible worlds which
he didn't visit, without any presents ?
(a) I don't think that's how quantum mechanics works (consider the
dual-slit experiment, where even if you send single photons you
still end up with an interference pattern)
(b) a wizard did it
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you?
It's very much his style.
I think Tom Lehrer existed. And still does.
"Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote in message news:kup387Fjg63U1@mid.individual.net...
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you?
It's very much his style.
What style ?
He was neither a comedian nor an actor as you claim above.
In fact he was a singer-songwriter satirist and a mathematician
whose output was limited to songs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer
Given that not a single line in the whole six paragraphs of
the quoted material appears to either rhyme or scan, it seems
quite possible that you may be mistaken.
On 23/12/2023 21:56, Norman Wells wrote:
I think Tom Lehrer existed. And still does.
I thought that must be wrong, but in fact he is still alive, aged 95!
Whilst looking that up, I was amused to note that the BBC banned 10 of
the 12 tracks on his first album.
On 23/12/2023 21:54, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 19:01, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)
 in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of >>>>>>> Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the
author's agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work? >>>>>
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the
American comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
And many, many more are attributed to those who did.
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you? It's
very much his style.
'It is something they would have said' is the basis for many false attributions.
While Lehrer proved that it is possible to sing the periodic table, this
does not strike me as a catchy ditty he could sing while sitting at the piano. I also wonder why a mathematician would describe it as an
engineer's view.
I can't rule out Lehrer, but it seems to me to be more likely to have originated as a seasonal puff piece in a serious publication for engineers.
"Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote in message news:kup387Fjg63U1@mid.individual.net...
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you?
It's very much his style.
What style ?
He was neither a comedian nor an actor as you claim above.
In fact he was a singer-songwriter satirist and a mathematician
whose output was limited to songs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Lehrer
Given that not a single line in the whole six paragraphs of
the quoted material appears to either rhyme or scan, it seems
quite possible that you may be mistaken.
On 24/12/2023 09:50, GB wrote:
On 23/12/2023 21:56, Norman Wells wrote:
I think Tom Lehrer existed. And still does.
I thought that must be wrong, but in fact he is still alive, aged 95!
Whilst looking that up, I was amused to note that the BBC banned 10 of
the 12 tracks on his first album.
He was a fine comedian and ahead of his time.
All the world seems in tune on a spring afternoon
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park
Every Sunday you'll see my sweetheart and me
As we poison the pigeons in the park
When they see us coming
The birdies all try and hide
But they still go for peanuts
When coated with cyanide
The sun's shining bright
Everything seems all right
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park.
On 24/12/2023 11:14, The Todal wrote:
On 24/12/2023 09:50, GB wrote:
On 23/12/2023 21:56, Norman Wells wrote:
I think Tom Lehrer existed. And still does.
I thought that must be wrong, but in fact he is still alive, aged 95!
Whilst looking that up, I was amused to note that the BBC banned 10 of
the 12 tracks on his first album.
He was a fine comedian and ahead of his time.
All the world seems in tune on a spring afternoon
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park
Every Sunday you'll see my sweetheart and me
As we poison the pigeons in the park
When they see us coming
The birdies all try and hide
But they still go for peanuts
When coated with cyanide
The sun's shining bright
Everything seems all right
When we're poisoning pigeons in the park.
At the time, and I was 15, I thought that read as very Groucho.
Nowadays, even more so.
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th
of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill
the stocking, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat
whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump
into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
He also needs to visit for each naughty child, because he has to put
coal in their stockings.
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec
2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)  in >>>>> the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, >>>>> Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's
agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
So, it seems good luck isn't difficult to come by.
On 23-Dec-23 11:56, kat wrote:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th
of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill
the stocking, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat
whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump
into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
He also needs to visit for each naughty child, because he has to put
coal in their stockings.
Well he isn't getting that coal from anywhere in the UK. Is he going
through the proper channels for all that imported coal?
On 23-Dec-23 11:56, kat wrote:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:Well he isn't getting that coal from anywhere in the UK. Is he going through
each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th of a >>> second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stocking,
distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have >>> been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto
the next house.
He also needs to visit for each naughty child, because he has to put coal in >> their stockings.
the proper channels for all that imported coal?
On 23/12/2023 19:47, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2023-12-23, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 Dec >>>>> 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18)  in >>>>>>> the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, >>>>>>> Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the author's >>>>>> agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work?
Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the American
comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never actually
said them.
If you're asking ChatGPT then I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few
sayings are attributed to people who never actually existed.
At least this gives us an insight into how Norman deals with questions
posed in ULM which might go a significant way towards explaining why his answers are, how shall I put, less than legally sound.
On 24/12/2023 11:25, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/12/2023 09:20, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 21:54, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 19:01, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 >>>>>>> Dec 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago. >>>>>>
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) >>>>>>>>>  in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of >>>>>>>>> Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the
author's agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work? >>>>>>>
American comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never
actually said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
And many, many more are attributed to those who did.
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you?
It's very much his style.
'It is something they would have said' is the basis for many false
attributions.
While Lehrer proved that it is possible to sing the periodic table,
this does not strike me as a catchy ditty he could sing while sitting
at the piano. I also wonder why a mathematician would describe it as
an engineer's view.
I can't rule out Lehrer, but it seems to me to be more likely to have
originated as a seasonal puff piece in a serious publication for
engineers.
He's the best we've got so far.
In fact, he's the only one we've got so far.
He may the best *you've* got, but please do not attempt to drag us all
into your world. Some of us care about the accuracy of our posts.
The earliest attribution I can find is from (the now defunct) Spy
magazine from February 1991:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cZjZqaqi3TUC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA50&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Do you have any verifiable cite that pre-dates this and contains an attribution to Lehrer?
The earliest attribution I can find is from (the now defunct) Spy
magazine from February 1991:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cZjZqaqi3TUC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA50&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
On 2023-12-24, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
On 23-Dec-23 11:56, kat wrote:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:
each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th
of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill
the stocking, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat
whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump
into the sleigh and get onto the next house.
He also needs to visit for each naughty child, because he has to put
coal in their stockings.
Well he isn't getting that coal from anywhere in the UK. Is he going
through the proper channels for all that imported coal?
There is still one remaining UK coal mine, at Aberpergwm. It's even expanding, unless the Coal Action Network manages to overturn the
court ruling that its licence to do so is valid (the appeal appears
to be pending).
The earliest attribution I can find is from (the now defunct) Spy magazine from
February 1991:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cZjZqaqi3TUC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA50&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
On 24/12/2023 18:38, Colin Bignell wrote:
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
Is that why our local town centre is overrun with them? (feral rock
doves to be exact, "town pigeons")
On 24/12/2023 18:38, Colin Bignell wrote:
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
Is that why our local town centre is overrun with them? (feral rock
doves to be exact, "town pigeons")
On Wednesday, December 27, 2023 at 4:59:43 PM UTC, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 24/12/2023 18:38, Colin Bignell wrote:
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
Is that why our local town centre is overrun with them? (feral rock
doves to be exact, "town pigeons")
It may be partly because farmers / gamekeepers tend to kill
sparrowhawks and similar predators, who would otherwise tend
to keep pigeon numbers down.
Perhaps you could lobby your town councillors to somehow
encourage greater avian predator numbers. Or get some local
shopkeepers to band together to hire a falconer.
Which would probably be legal, because pigeons, and pigeon
poo, can carry diseases. The Internet says they carry more
diseases than rats.
"pensive hamster" wrote
Which would probably be legal, because pigeons, and pigeon
poo, can carry diseases. The Internet says they carry more
diseases than rats.
Or hamsters ?
Which would probably be legal, because pigeons, and pigeon
poo, can carry diseases. The Internet says they carry more
diseases than rats.
On Wednesday, December 27, 2023 at 4:59:43 PM UTC, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 24/12/2023 18:38, Colin Bignell wrote:
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
Is that why our local town centre is overrun with them? (feral rock
doves to be exact, "town pigeons")
It may be partly because farmers / gamekeepers tend to kill
sparrowhawks and similar predators, who would otherwise tend
to keep pigeon numbers down.
Perhaps you could lobby your town councillors to somehow
encourage greater avian predator numbers. Or get some local
shopkeepers to band together to hire a falconer.
On Wednesday, December 27, 2023 at 4:59:43 PM UTC, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 24/12/2023 18:38, Colin Bignell wrote:
It was a protest song against a pigeon cull somewhere in the USA.
Is that why our local town centre is overrun with them? (feral rock
doves to be exact, "town pigeons")
It may be partly because farmers / gamekeepers tend to kill
sparrowhawks and similar predators, who would otherwise tend
to keep pigeon numbers down.
Perhaps you could lobby your town councillors to somehow
encourage greater avian predator numbers. Or get some local
shopkeepers to band together to hire a falconer.
Which would probably be legal, because pigeons, and pigeon
poo, can carry diseases. The Internet says they carry more
diseases than rats.
The owners of the Grade I listed bell tower in my town have installed (if that's the right word) a breeding pair of Peregrine Falcons, with the intention of deterring pigeons.
Hoswever, it doesn't seem to have been quite as sucessful as they'd hoped. The falcons themselves are popular with the public, and have become a mini tourist atttraction in their own right. But the tower is just as infested with pigeons, and hence pigeon poo, as it was before. I suspect there are simply too many of them for the falcons to realistically eat.
On 23/12/2023 21:54, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 19:01, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:And many, many more are attributed to those who did.
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23 >>>>>Dec 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 07:30, Roland Perry wrote:Good luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago.
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) >>>>>>> in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of >>>>>>>Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist
I've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a gross >>>>>>infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the
author's agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work? >>>>>
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to the
American comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
Quite a few sayings are often attributed to people who never
actually said them.
https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/misquoted-sayings
I don't think you need to look much further than Lehrer, do you?
It's very much his style.
'It is something they would have said' is the basis for many false >attributions.
While Lehrer proved that it is possible to sing the periodic table,
this does not strike me as a catchy ditty he could sing while sitting
at the piano. I also wonder why a mathematician would describe it as an >engineer's view.
I can't rule out Lehrer, but it seems to me to be more likely to have >originated as a seasonal puff piece in a serious publication for
engineers.
In message <6y6dnT4Dtuv9ahr4nZ2dnZeNn_Vi4p2d@giganews.com>, at 09:20:30
on Sun, 24 Dec 2023, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> remarked:
On 23/12/2023 21:54, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 19:01, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 23/12/2023 14:40, Norman Wells wrote:
On 23/12/2023 13:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <um6b1s$20va9$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:59:25 on Sat, 23
Dec 2023, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> remarked:
ChatGPT says instantly 'The quote is often attributed to theI've cut out most of your post, as it appears to be a grossGood luck finding the person who originally wrote that, decades ago. >>>>>
infringement of copyright. Unless, of course, you have the
author's agreement to distribute it and pretend it's your own work? >>>>>>
American comedian and actor Tom Lehrer'.
While Lehrer proved that it is possible to sing the periodic table,
this does not strike me as a catchy ditty he could sing while sitting
at the piano. I also wonder why a mathematician would describe it as
an engineer's view.
I can't rule out Lehrer, but it seems to me to be more likely to have
originated as a seasonal puff piece in a serious publication for
engineers.
It's most likely a compilation,
and we should also look at some of the
stats in the first paragraph to see if it's possible to date.
On 24/12/2023 21:33, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/12/2023 18:50, Simon Parker wrote:
On 24/12/2023 11:25, Norman Wells wrote:
He's the best we've got so far.
In fact, he's the only one we've got so far.
He may the best *you've* got, but please do not attempt to drag us
all into your world. Some of us care about the accuracy of our posts.
My posts have been perfectly accurate, thank you. What do you think
was wrong with any of them?
We could start with your claim that the work was by Tom Lehrer because
that's what ChatGPT told you.
Even though you were merely parroting the words of ChatGPT,
it is clear
that neither you nor ChatGPT are familiar with Tom Lehrer or you would
have been aware of the statement he issued on the 26th November 2022 concerning copyright in his works (Spoiler Alert: it finished with the
words: "So help yourselves, and don’t send me any money.").
If, and that's a big if, the claim that the work was by Tom Lehrer was correct, he would be the last person to pursue a copyright claim for
posting his works as he has permanently and irrevocably relinquished all copyrights in his works.
In short, if your claim of the authorship of the post was correct, your
claim that Roland had breached Mr Lehrer's copyright in posting it could
not be correct.
Alternatively, if your claim of authorship was
incorrect, we were no further forward than we were without your post.
TLDR: Your post was wrong, whichever way you want to look at it and
therefore was of no use in advancing the discussion.
The earliest attribution I can find is from (the now defunct) Spy
magazine from February 1991:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cZjZqaqi3TUC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA50&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Well, jolly good. But what does that prove?
It proves that real research is far more useful than asking ChatGPT for
an answer which, even if should it have turned out to be correct, only
proved that the statement it was being used to support was itself wrong.
Do you have any verifiable cite that pre-dates this and contains an
attribution to Lehrer?
There is no indication in the article you've cited of the author of
it. And it could perfectly feasibly have been written originally by
Lehrer, who would have been 62 years old by that time I don't
therefore see how that advances the discussion in the slightest.
The article in Spy magazine isn't attributed to Lehrer nor does it
indicate it is a reproduction of a copyrighted work of his.
(Compare
and contrast with the image of Bart Simpson on the cover where Matt Groening's work is clearly acknowledged as such.)
Similarly, within the magazine copyright of the contents, including the article in question, is asserted by Spy Publishing Partners L.P. and the magazine is big enough to have a ISSN number so isn't likely to play
fast and loose with reproducing the copyrighted works of third parties
hoping nobody will notice.
Anyway, Spy Magazine is hardly a 'serious publication for engineers',Ah, the old "I was wrong, but so was he" defence. Sadly, (for you),
as Mr Bignell thought 'more likely'.
that means you were still wrong.
On 24/12/2023 21:37, Norman Wells wrote:
On 24/12/2023 18:49, Simon Parker wrote:
On 23/12/2023 19:47, Jon Ribbens wrote:
If you're asking ChatGPT then I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few
sayings are attributed to people who never actually existed.
At least this gives us an insight into how Norman deals with
questions posed in ULM which might go a significant way towards
explaining why his answers are, how shall I put, less than legally
sound.
Well, I note you have no alternative.
Anyway, all I did was quote what ChatGPT said, with that attribution
You posted this message after you'd replied to the message in which I
posted what I believe to be the origin of the content of Roland's post,
an article in Spy Magazine from February 1991, so I find it bizarre in
the extreme that you claim to "note [I] have no alternative".
But when a poster has a penchant for making increasingly bizarre claims
in their posts I doubt anybody is surprised by your latest logic-defying claim.
Do you think it's acceptable to copy someone else's relatively recent
work and reproduce it verbatim online without any established consent?
I recommend reviewing how copyright works in America, particularly for >magazines such as Spy as it is very different to the UK.
On 01/01/2024 11:47, Norman Wells wrote:
On 01/01/2024 09:53, Simon Parker wrote:
On 24/12/2023 21:37, Norman Wells wrote:
Who are you claiming is the author then?Well, I note you have no alternative.
Anyway, all I did was quote what ChatGPT said, with that attribution
You posted this message after you'd replied to the message in which
I posted what I believe to be the origin of the content of Roland's >>>post, an article in Spy Magazine from February 1991, so I find it
bizarre in the extreme that you claim to "note [I] have no alternative".
I recommend re-reading my paragraph quoted above, paying particular
attention to the parenthetical phrase enclosed in commas, as the answer
to your question is contained therein.
As I have told you on numerous occasions, repeating a question is
unlikely to yield a different answer, regardless of how many times you
repeat the same question.
Please expect further repetitions of this question, or derivatives
thereof, to be ignored.
And who says that's where Mr Perry got it from?
With the greatest of respect, I am disinclined to acquiesce to your
request to accompany you down this particular rabbit hole.
Since *you* are the one alleging Roland has breached copyright, it is
for *you* to identify the entity that holds copyright in the article
and for *you* to provide the evidence that substantiates your claim.
(Free clue: you can gain access to the Register of Copyrights within
the Library of Congress here: https://www.copyright.gov/ Happy trails.)
Everything you have posted on the matter to date falls some
considerable way short of this and unless and until you can provide
further and better particulars I do not believe there is anything
worthy of discussion.
Do you think it's acceptable to copy someone else's relatively recent
work and reproduce it verbatim online without any established consent?
I refer you to the answer provided in response to the question asked >immediately above this.
And moreover from a publication you say elsewhere has a clear
copyright notice on it?
Ditto.
But when a poster has a penchant for making increasingly bizarreWhat claim? Is this related to anything in the above, or just a
claims in their posts I doubt anybody is surprised by your latest >>>logic-defying claim.
random denigration?
Right at the top of this post your claim is quoted in full, namely:
"Well, I note you have no alternative."
When you said this, not only had you seen the message in which I posted
what I believe to be the origin of the content of Roland's post, but
you had actually replied to it.
If you do not believe it is logic-defying to reply to a post and then
claim that the post to which you have replied doesn't exist, then I am >unlikely to be able to assist you further. Similarly, if you do not
believe that it is bizarre to make such easily disproven logic-defying
claims then, again, I am unlikely to be able to assist you further.
Finally, if you believe it is unfair, and hence denigrating, to refer
to such a claim as "bizarre" and / or "logic-defying" then we must
agree to differ about what is fair comment in a discussion. Similarly,
if you think any and all criticism of your posts is automatically
unfair because your posts are above criticism regardless of the >circumstances, then we must also agree to differ.
Regards
S.P.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 36:34:00 |
| Calls: | 6,707 |
| Files: | 12,239 |
| Messages: | 5,353,437 |