From: William Clark on
In article <7su2qsFcfqU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
"dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote:

> "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message
> news:f19a6928-2b61-4a6d-8288-21254cae884a(a)z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 3, 11:37 am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-
> state.edu> wrote:
> > In article
>
> >
> > > > > You don't seem to want to take my bet, so what else is there to say?
> > > > > Your academic chauvinism is entertaining to me!
> >
> > > > You on the other hand, seem to need to make a "bet" in order to
> provide
> > > > something that every respectable academic does willingly and for free.
> >
> > > > Could it be that you don't actually have any publications in the
> > > > materials science literature? Certainly the Science Citation Index
> says
> > > > you don't, and I am more inclined to believe that than I am Bert.
> >
> > > > No, the answer is clear - you have not attended any materials science
> > > > symposia, nor do you have any publications in the materials science
> > > > journals. Pure and simple - you lied. And now you have to bluster to
> > > > cover it up. Shame on you.
> >
> > > I know my background. You do not, and that is a fact. You are lying
> > > without proper knowledge. My CV has been posted for a long time for
> > > anyone to look at. You are probably just envious of the fact that I am
> > > at least published academically in a field where your productivity is
> > > lacking.
> >
> > I did fid your publication list on Science Citation Index, or have you
> > chosen to forget that? No evidence there of any materials science
> > activity, so I believe that you were not telling the truth when you
> > claimed to have a) attended materials science symposia, and b) published
> > in the materials science literature. Your continued weaseling simply
> > reinforces that opinion. All the hot air in the world cannot make up for
> > that whopper.
>
> Ahh! You're green with envy aren't you!
>
> I'll defer to your cowardice, and make the bet fifty bucks! Surely you
> can trust your judgment for 50 bucks worth!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is getting very interesting. C'mon William. What's $50? Surely your
> bluster...er....honor is worth more than that??
>
> Anybody want to make a side bet of $50? My money is on Rob.
>
> -Greg

Go for it. It simply shows how little you understand about academic
integrity.
From: William Clark on
In article <MPG.25d3a0d3a2af5dad989b17(a)news.giganews.com>,
BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

> In article <7su2qsFcfqU1(a)mid.individual.net>, dene(a)remove.ipns.com
> says...
> >
> > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message
> > news:f19a6928-2b61-4a6d-8288-21254cae884a(a)z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 3, 11:37 am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-
> > state.edu> wrote:
> > > In article
> >
> > >
> > > > > > You don't seem to want to take my bet, so what else is there to say?
> > > > > > Your academic chauvinism is entertaining to me!
> > >
> > > > > You on the other hand, seem to need to make a "bet" in order to
> > provide
> > > > > something that every respectable academic does willingly and for free.
> > >
> > > > > Could it be that you don't actually have any publications in the
> > > > > materials science literature? Certainly the Science Citation Index
> > says
> > > > > you don't, and I am more inclined to believe that than I am Bert.
> > >
> > > > > No, the answer is clear - you have not attended any materials science
> > > > > symposia, nor do you have any publications in the materials science
> > > > > journals. Pure and simple - you lied. And now you have to bluster to
> > > > > cover it up. Shame on you.
> > >
> > > > I know my background. You do not, and that is a fact. You are lying
> > > > without proper knowledge. My CV has been posted for a long time for
> > > > anyone to look at. You are probably just envious of the fact that I am
> > > > at least published academically in a field where your productivity is
> > > > lacking.
> > >
> > > I did fid your publication list on Science Citation Index, or have you
> > > chosen to forget that? No evidence there of any materials science
> > > activity, so I believe that you were not telling the truth when you
> > > claimed to have a) attended materials science symposia, and b) published
> > > in the materials science literature. Your continued weaseling simply
> > > reinforces that opinion. All the hot air in the world cannot make up for
> > > that whopper.
> >
> > Ahh! You're green with envy aren't you!
> >
> > I'll defer to your cowardice, and make the bet fifty bucks! Surely you
> > can trust your judgment for 50 bucks worth!
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > This is getting very interesting. C'mon William. What's $50? Surely your
> > bluster...er....honor is worth more than that??
> >
> > Anybody want to make a side bet of $50? My money is on Rob.
>
> My $1 bet is still on that Billy won't take the bet.

My "bet" is still that Bertie and Dino will be shown to play fast and
loose with the truth.

So, Bertie, where is the "proof" you claimed Dino had produced? Oops.
From: assimilate on

On 3-Feb-2010, Don Kirkman <donsno2(a)charter.net> wrote:

> As is constantly
> being argued in this newsgroup, opinion is not equivalent to fact.

arguing in a newgroup & fact in the same sentence! You a newbie? ;-)

--
bill-o
From: Carbon on
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:08:06 +0000, assimilate wrote:
> On 3-Feb-2010, Don Kirkman <donsno2(a)charter.net> wrote:
>
>> As is constantly being argued in this newsgroup, opinion is not
>> equivalent to fact.
>
> arguing in a newgroup & fact in the same sentence! You a newbie? ;-)

Facts still matter, even if most ignore them.
From: BAR on
In article <clark-66C96B.21183103022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
state.edu>, clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says...
> > Ahh! You're green with envy aren't you!
> >
> > I'll defer to your cowardice, and make the bet fifty bucks! Surely you
> > can trust your judgment for 50 bucks worth!
>
> No, I wouldn't even take it. I value scientific integrity far more than
> any miserable $50. Apparently you don't.
>
> So, you are still a demonstrated liar. Take the chance to prove us
wrong.

Bullshit. If you had any scientific integrity you would want Jones' and
Mann's degrees rescinded. And, you would want the rest of their Cabal's
degrees rescinded for scientific malpractice.