A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 22nd 07, 04:59 PM posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
Jeff Strickland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?


"Bruce Jensen" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 20, 7:30 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 18 May 2007 10:08:33 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:

On May 18, 8:32 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:


Here's a generalization for you: E=mc**2


No, it isn't.


It's a generalization, idiot. E depends on m, which can VARY. In other
words, it is GENERALLY true of all matter. That's cxalled a
"generalization". DUH!


My God, is there no end to it?

First off, it is not GENERALLY true of all matter - it is PRECISELY
true of all matter. "Generally" implies that there is some instance
in which it does not apply - and for this case, there is no such
discovered instance.

Second, the word for which you vainly search that applies to this
equation is "function," not generalization. Specifically, E is a
function of m. Must you misdefine and invent *everything* to try to
shore up your ridiculous arguments?


Welcome the Vandeman New World Dictionary, where the meaning of a word is
never defined in a manner which most people use it.

PS
Mike, that is a generalization, E=mc2 is not a generalization.

Bank robbers drive cars, therefore all car drivers are bank robbers is an
invalid "generalization" that you frequently make relative to mountain bike
riders, but never make relative to other kinds of visitors to public lands.
Another generalization that does not hold true is, all PhDs are idiots.





Thank God you didn't go into physics or mathematics, which require
some level of discipline and precision - psychology, with all of its
hedging, rash generalizations and screwy malapropisms is the *perfect*
place for you. Please stay there.


Ads
  #22  
Old May 22nd 07, 05:01 PM posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
Bruce Jensen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 522
Default What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?

On May 22, 6:57 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 20 May 2007 21:36:35 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:


Which makes it generally true. An expert in the English language, you
are NOT. You are using the wrong meaning of "general".


Snicker - You don't like the meaning *I* choose, eh? Well, tough -
in your lame example YOU are using the wrong meaning for the original
context, which was about bigotry, not about mathematical or logical
relationships.

Second, the word for which you vainly search that applies to this
equation is "function," not generalization. Specifically, E is a
function of m. Must you misdefine and invent *everything* to try to
shore up your ridiculous arguments?


Thank God you didn't go into physics or mathematics, which require
some level of discipline and precision


Another perfect example of why you can't be trusted: you don't even
know that I DID "go into physics or mathematics". BOTH. I got straight
A's in honors physics, and honors in mathematics at UC Berkeley and an
MA in math from Harvard. It would appear that when you don't know
something, you simply FABRICATE (=LIE).


That's right - in order to win an argument, he trots out his
"credentials" and resorts to additional character attacks. You sound
like Michael Savage. Are you sure you're not a Repuglican?

Anyway, big deal. All that education and you're still a fool. A
perfect example of why *you* cannot be trusted.

- psychology, with all of its
hedging, rash generalizations and screwy malapropisms is the *perfect*
place for you. Please stay there.


Sounds like you know just as little about the science of psychology as
you do about physics, math, and the environment.


Listen, smart guy, I ripped through just as much physics and math as
you did, and maybe more, in my college career. It makes no difference
- if you don't have the sensibility to apply it to the real world
(which you clearly do not), none of it will do you a bit of good. On
top of that, you are a misanthropic, bitter jerk, and as a result you
fall flat on your face every time...hence the psychology is ALSO lost
on you.

Psychology = science? Puhleeeze, give me a break. As you are so fond
of pointing out, mere observations and statistics are not real
science.

(Note the prior sentence is baiting - let's see if he takes it).

You are like an
abused dog, that barks at anything that moves, for no reason.


What a swell analogy - that logically falls apart, as usual, like
everything else you say. You ARE an abused dog. All we can feel is
pity for you.

For all your baseless ranting about staying out of the woods, I hear
the voices of John Muir, Bob Marshall, Ed Abbey, H.D. Thoreau and
Ansel Adams far more loudly and eloquently. People are natural
creatures, with natural connections to the land, the forest, the
mountains, the waters and the animals. To avoid it is unnatural, and
that is something that you in your ivory tower will never understand.
Probably better that way - we don't need misguided misanthropes
stalking decent people in the wilderness.

I am done - feel free to rant and bluster until you're blue.

Bruce Jensen

  #23  
Old May 22nd 07, 05:06 PM posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
Jeff Strickland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On 20 May 2007 21:36:35 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:

On May 20, 7:30 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 18 May 2007 10:08:33 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:

On May 18, 8:32 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:

Here's a generalization for you: E=mc**2

No, it isn't.

It's a generalization, idiot. E depends on m, which can VARY. In other
words, it is GENERALLY true of all matter. That's cxalled a
"generalization". DUH!


My God, is there no end to it?

First off, it is not GENERALLY true of all matter - it is PRECISELY
true of all matter. "Generally" implies that there is some instance
in which it does not apply - and for this case, there is no such
discovered instance.


Which makes it generally true. An expert in the English language, you
are NOT. You are using the wrong meaning of "general".


An expert in the english language OR in science, clearly you are not.

A generalization is generally true, e=mc2 is precisely true all of the time
under all conditions. E never equals mc3 or mc, it equals only mc2. If one
alters any one of energy, mass , or speed, then the remaining components
will automatically change to make E=mc2, which makes E=mc2 a precision
statement, not a generalization.






  #24  
Old May 24th 07, 02:35 AM posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
Mike Vandeman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,798
Default What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?

On Tue, 22 May 2007 15:59:13 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:


"Bruce Jensen" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 20, 7:30 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 18 May 2007 10:08:33 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:

On May 18, 8:32 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:

Here's a generalization for you: E=mc**2

No, it isn't.

It's a generalization, idiot. E depends on m, which can VARY. In other
words, it is GENERALLY true of all matter. That's cxalled a
"generalization". DUH!


My God, is there no end to it?

First off, it is not GENERALLY true of all matter - it is PRECISELY
true of all matter. "Generally" implies that there is some instance
in which it does not apply - and for this case, there is no such
discovered instance.

Second, the word for which you vainly search that applies to this
equation is "function," not generalization. Specifically, E is a
function of m. Must you misdefine and invent *everything* to try to
shore up your ridiculous arguments?


Welcome the Vandeman New World Dictionary, where the meaning of a word is
never defined in a manner which most people use it.


On top of everything else, I also have to teach you ENGLISH? Just
because you are too lazy to look in a dictionary? "a general
statement, law, principle, or proposition". QED Idiot.

PS
Mike, that is a generalization, E=mc2 is not a generalization.

Bank robbers drive cars, therefore all car drivers are bank robbers is an
invalid "generalization" that you frequently make relative to mountain bike
riders, but never make relative to other kinds of visitors to public lands.
Another generalization that does not hold true is, all PhDs are idiots.





Thank God you didn't go into physics or mathematics, which require
some level of discipline and precision - psychology, with all of its
hedging, rash generalizations and screwy malapropisms is the *perfect*
place for you. Please stay there.

--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
  #25  
Old May 24th 07, 02:43 AM posted to alt.mountain-bike,rec.bicycles.soc,rec.backcountry,ca.environment,sci.environment
Jeff Strickland
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar?


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 May 2007 15:59:13 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:


"Bruce Jensen" wrote in message
roups.com...
On May 20, 7:30 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On 18 May 2007 10:08:33 -0700, Bruce Jensen
wrote:

On May 18, 8:32 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:

Here's a generalization for you: E=mc**2

No, it isn't.

It's a generalization, idiot. E depends on m, which can VARY. In other
words, it is GENERALLY true of all matter. That's cxalled a
"generalization". DUH!

My God, is there no end to it?

First off, it is not GENERALLY true of all matter - it is PRECISELY
true of all matter. "Generally" implies that there is some instance
in which it does not apply - and for this case, there is no such
discovered instance.

Second, the word for which you vainly search that applies to this
equation is "function," not generalization. Specifically, E is a
function of m. Must you misdefine and invent *everything* to try to
shore up your ridiculous arguments?


Welcome the Vandeman New World Dictionary, where the meaning of a word is
never defined in a manner which most people use it.


On top of everything else, I also have to teach you ENGLISH? Just
because you are too lazy to look in a dictionary? "a general
statement, law, principle, or proposition". QED Idiot.



But Michael, your (that's YOUR) example is E=mc2. There is nothing, that's
N-O-T-H-I-N-G, general about E=mc2.






 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's the Difference between a Lawyer and a Liar? Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 27 May 24th 07 02:43 AM
Fess up, LIAR! crit PRO Racing 17 March 2nd 06 12:21 PM
Do Not buy from a proven Liar! MOJO Marketplace 0 January 12th 06 01:24 PM
JD a Liar? Stephen Baker Mountain Biking 2 November 17th 04 01:12 PM
Flab ( Ed ) is a liar Mo Recumbent Biking 24 July 7th 03 12:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.