Mass.acre!
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 31 Jan 2010 12:35 In article <MPG.25cf561f10d6438b989af4(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <wclark2-B9FBD1.17231830012010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > In article <MPG.25ce10a1523c71fb989ae8(a)news.giganews.com>, > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > In article <clark-B79122.09584229012010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > state.edu>, clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > > > > > > In article <MPG.25ccb4457acbf6f3989add(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article <bd2a7183-1bb3-45af-9786-e1c1ac0cb5c2 > > > > > @b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, frostback2002(a)att.net says... > > > > > > > > > > > > The most interesting aspect of this is your great concern. IF you > > > > > > take > > > > > > the position that I have never published anything in the area of > > > > > > materials science, you become, as a point of fact, a liar. It is > > > > > > not > > > > > > just a matter of being misinformed, because my CV was published > > > > > > online > > > > > > and available for many years, for anyone to see. > > > > > > > > > > > > What is more relevant is that your concern suggests that you are > > > > > > unpublished, or publish little in the area, isn't it, and it > > > > > > bothers > > > > > > you because you think there is some sort of academic status > > > > > > associated > > > > > > with who employs you in this business, when in fact academic status > > > > > > is > > > > > > solely a function of your accomplishments. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now as I claim zero status as a materials scientist, and I claim > > > > > > none, > > > > > > it becomes a problem for you that I have published in the area, > > > > > > because you want to claim some sort of status here, when you, like > > > > > > I, > > > > > > have none! > > > > > > > > > > > > In any event, the $5K bet is still open. > > > > > > > > > > I have a $1US that says Billy doesn't take your bet. > > > > > > > > Damn right I am not. This is not an issue for "bets", this is about the > > > > core of academic integrity. He is claiming to have attended meetings > > > > and > > > > published in a field where it is absolutely clear he has not. George > > > > O'Leary lost his job for doing exactly the same thing, but I am sure > > > > your wingnut double standards can find a way around that. > > > > > > If you are so cocksure you are right why not take the bet. You get $5K > > > and you get to nail a college prof to the wall. "Dr." Phil Jones of > > > UEA's CRU nailed himself without a bet. > > > > I have provided him with the evidence for free. I am not not taking his > > money. > > Right. You have doubts and you don't want to lose the money and more of > your credibility. No, his is clearly already gone. Your stupid bet is just blowhard posturing.
From: William Clark on 31 Jan 2010 12:36 In article <f9e4fd12-6bb6-4922-a007-50b9de935bc4(a)36g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > On Jan 30, 5:22�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > In article > > <c983b1ed-4491-489a-83a5-81dd66c80...(a)k41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > On Jan 29, 2:47�pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- > > > state.edu> wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <408045d7-bc01-4ccf-a946-7e0616597...(a)r6g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 29, 9:58 am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- > > > > > state.edu> wrote: > > > > > > In article <MPG.25ccb4457acbf6f3989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > > > > > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In article <bd2a7183-1bb3-45af-9786-e1c1ac0cb5c2 > > > > > > > @b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, frostback2...(a)att.net says... > > > > > > > > > > The most interesting aspect of this is your great concern. IF > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > take > > > > > > > > the position that I have never published anything in the area > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > materials science, you become, as a point of fact, a liar. It > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > just a matter of being misinformed, because my CV was published > > > > > > > > online > > > > > > > > and available for many years, for anyone to see. > > > > > > > > > > What is more relevant is that your concern suggests that you > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > unpublished, or publish little in the area, isn't it, and it > > > > > > > > bothers > > > > > > > > you because you think there is some sort of academic status > > > > > > > > associated > > > > > > > > with who employs you in this business, when in fact academic > > > > > > > > status > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > solely a function of your accomplishments. > > > > > > > > > > Now as I claim zero status as a materials scientist, and I > > > > > > > > claim > > > > > > > > none, > > > > > > > > it becomes a problem for you that I have published in the area, > > > > > > > > because you want to claim some sort of status here, when you, > > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > I, > > > > > > > > have none! > > > > > > > > > > In any event, the $5K bet is still open. > > > > > > > > > I have a $1US that says Billy doesn't take your bet. > > > > > > > > Damn right I am not. This is not an issue for "bets", this is about > > > > > > the > > > > > > core of academic integrity. He is claiming to have attended > > > > > > meetings > > > > > > and > > > > > > published in a field where it is absolutely clear he has not. > > > > > > George > > > > > > O'Leary lost his job for doing exactly the same thing, but I am > > > > > > sure > > > > > > your wingnut double standards can find a way around that. > > > > > > > If claiming that you have done something you have not is a serious > > > > > issue, then a false accusation of such should be equally serious, > > > > > should it not? If so, then you should be fired. > > > > > > Well, given that publication records are the open currency of academia, > > > > anyone who is unwilling to back up a claim like yours by showing them > > > > is > > > > immediately suspect. > > > > > > Of course, you can clear it up right away, but each attempt to weasel > > > > out of answering the question simply makes you look more and more > > > > guilty. > > > > > You are right, it is completely open. If you care so much, you could > > > look it up. In any event, a false accusation of misconduct should > > > carry the same penalty for the accuser that a true accusation would > > > for the accused, especially given that you can look it up....very > > > easily, as you know. > > > > As a matter of fact, Science Citation index comes up with eight > > publications for you, not one of which comes anywhere even close to > > materials science. I can give you their list, if you like. > > > > So the evidence so far is 100% on my side. The ball is in your court to > > show where this is incorrect. > > What is silk? No answer again? I thought not. Would you like that list of citations so you can add your "materials science" publications to it?
From: bknight on 31 Jan 2010 12:37 On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:16:38 -0500, William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: >In article <MPG.25cf4f20b9b45579989aef(a)news.giganews.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> In article <wclark2-C43E1D.17084630012010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- >> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... >> > Well, Spain, Portugal, and Puerto Rica are above the US, Mexico below. >> > So it can be genetic - it must be socio-economic. So it simply proves >> > the point that the poor, who can not afford health insurance, have their >> > life expectancy drastically reduced by living under the US health >> > insurance system. >> > >> > Thank you for pointing that out. >> > >> >> I hate to point this out to you Billy but the people of Puerto Rico are >> US citizens. > >But they have a different health care system, that most importantly >specifically provides for the poor. Here read about it: They also do not pay Federal income tax and can't vote for president. BK
From: bknight on 31 Jan 2010 12:40 On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:31:21 -0800 (PST), kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote: >How do you explain Republican victories in Virginia, New Jersey and >Mass? > >Ken Easy Ken. They got more votes. BK
From: kenpitts on 31 Jan 2010 12:43
On Jan 31, 11:40 am, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:31:21 -0800 (PST), kenpitts > > <ken.p...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >How do you explain Republican victories in Virginia, New Jersey and > >Mass? > > >Ken > > Easy Ken. They got more votes. > > BK Gee, I knew I missed something. Ken |