Tom Tancredo
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 13:35 In article <6e3d57f0-67e8-415a-b5b1-9c41dc8516e6(a)o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > On Feb 16, 12:06�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > In article > > <7c676c32-8835-4312-89cc-cb2ff58e6...(a)d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > On Feb 15, 7:29�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > > > wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <e753220d-786f-46b0-a9e3-f0afab2c3...(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 13, 12:26�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > In article > > > > > > <b8033c9b-c8e1-42a5-9512-80e740b82...(a)15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 10:43�am, William Clark > > > > > > > <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > > <4b75eca0$0$5077$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > > > > > > > > > �Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:06:19 -0500, BAR wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > > > > <clark-EDF568.17402212022...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > > > > > > > > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > > > > > > > >> In article <MPG.25df7e125badc04a989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > > > > > > >> �BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Literate and poor or ignorant and rich? > > > > > > > > > > > >> Well, you are ignorant, but I doubt you are rich. > > > > > > > > > > > > You'd be surprised how much this dumb ignorant idiot has. > > > > > > > > > > > You think money makes you a better person? Guess what, Paris > > > > > > > > > Hilton > > > > > > > > > agrees with you. > > > > > > > > > > And bragging about (supposedly) having money is a sign of no > > > > > > > > class. > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > pretending to have proof that your soul mate published in > > > > > > > > journals > > > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > > field he doesn't know anything about. > > > > > > > > > Kinda like some fool claiming that he is an accomplished person > > > > > > > because of the name of the school that gave him a degree. I, > > > > > > > OTOH, > > > > > > > have actually published in the area of materials science, and > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > fact for some reason bothers you...which can only mean you are > > > > > > > envious! > > > > > > > > No, you have not. Fourth author in a chemistry proceedings of a > > > > > > conference you didn't even go to is absolutely NOT a materials > > > > > > science > > > > > > publication. Any more than mine in the IADR Proceedings makes me a > > > > > > dentist. Poor effort on your part. > > > > > > > > You suffer from a serious inferiority complex, that means your life > > > > > > is > > > > > > devoted to trying (unsuccessfully) to tear down anyone with even > > > > > > modest > > > > > > achievements in life. How very sad. > > > > > > > I see, so you found the ACS Symposium series presentation and > > > > > publication! Nope, doesn't make me a chemist, nor a seamstress (- > > > > > ster!) but silk is a material and the work done was in materials > > > > > science. There is one other publication in a much more significant > > > > > journal and another presentation at an international conference...I > > > > > even have a picture of me with everyone at the conference! > > > > > > And it sure doesn't make you even remotely anything to do with > > > > materials > > > > science. Chemists are always claiming to be "materials scientists", > > > > because there is more funding there than in their field. Silk is a > > > > textile, and this was a chemistry proceedings and not peer reviewed in > > > > the accepted way. Sorry - you lose. The other "publications" are > > > > equally > > > > bogus. > > > > > > > In any event, it remains interesting that you are so consumed by the > > > > > fact that I have done a bit of work in the area of materials science! > > > > > > Sorry, but you have not. I am more interested in the fact that you have > > > > to lie about it, in order to try to run down another academic. Doesn;t > > > > say a lot for your professional ethics, now does it? > > > > > You are the once forcing the issue here. I have offered nothing but > > > what I know. Your opinion is, as usual, meaningless. Materials science > > > is what it is, and lots of people get involved at various levels > > > (which holds true for any such areas). That the fact I have done some > > > materials science research, which to me is no big deal in any sense at > > > all, bothers you is both interesting and telling. > > > > Yes, but you are the one that claimed to know a great deal more than you > > do about "materials science", and then tried to justify that claim with > > phony "credentials". And, seeing as you have so conveniently forgotten, > > your claim was that you had a) attended materials science conferences, > > and b) published in the materials science journals. Too bad you have not > > been able to back those claims up so far. > > All I claimed was that I published in the field. Nothing more. Conference proceedings are not publications, especially when you are fourth author, or didn't your P&T Committee tell you that? Then there is the matter of your claim to have attended materials science conferences. Still missing that one, or are you quietly trying to forget you said that?
From: Moderate on 16 Feb 2010 14:50 "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-136058.13321416022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > It's not all that hard to get elected to the US Senate. More a matter of > money. Pretty hard to get a PhD from a good university, though. LOL, good one.
From: MNMikeW on 16 Feb 2010 14:57 "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-0BBF0A.13351816022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article > <6e3d57f0-67e8-415a-b5b1-9c41dc8516e6(a)o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> On Feb 16, 12:06 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> wrote: >> > In article >> > <7c676c32-8835-4312-89cc-cb2ff58e6...(a)d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>, >> > >> > >> > >> > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: >> > > On Feb 15, 7:29 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > In article >> > > > <e753220d-786f-46b0-a9e3-f0afab2c3...(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, >> > >> > > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: >> > > > > On Feb 13, 12:26 pm, William Clark >> > > > > <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > In article >> > > > > > <b8033c9b-c8e1-42a5-9512-80e740b82...(a)15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, >> > >> > > > > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: >> > > > > > > On Feb 13, 10:43 am, William Clark >> > > > > > > <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > In article >> > > > > > > > <4b75eca0$0$5077$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >> > >> > > > > > > > Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:06:19 -0500, BAR wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > In article >> > > > > > > > > > <clark-EDF568.17402212022...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- >> > > > > > > > > > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu >> > > > > > > > > > says... >> > > > > > > > > >> In article >> > > > > > > > > >> <MPG.25df7e125badc04a989...(a)news.giganews.com>, >> > > > > > > > > >> BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > > > >>> Literate and poor or ignorant and rich? >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Well, you are ignorant, but I doubt you are rich. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > You'd be surprised how much this dumb ignorant idiot >> > > > > > > > > > has. >> > >> > > > > > > > > You think money makes you a better person? Guess what, >> > > > > > > > > Paris >> > > > > > > > > Hilton >> > > > > > > > > agrees with you. >> > >> > > > > > > > And bragging about (supposedly) having money is a sign of >> > > > > > > > no >> > > > > > > > class. >> > > > > > > > Like >> > > > > > > > pretending to have proof that your soul mate published in >> > > > > > > > journals >> > > > > > > > in a >> > > > > > > > field he doesn't know anything about. >> > >> > > > > > > Kinda like some fool claiming that he is an accomplished >> > > > > > > person >> > > > > > > because of the name of the school that gave him a degree. I, >> > > > > > > OTOH, >> > > > > > > have actually published in the area of materials science, and >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > fact for some reason bothers you...which can only mean you >> > > > > > > are >> > > > > > > envious! >> > >> > > > > > No, you have not. Fourth author in a chemistry proceedings of a >> > > > > > conference you didn't even go to is absolutely NOT a materials >> > > > > > science >> > > > > > publication. Any more than mine in the IADR Proceedings makes >> > > > > > me a >> > > > > > dentist. Poor effort on your part. >> > >> > > > > > You suffer from a serious inferiority complex, that means your >> > > > > > life >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > devoted to trying (unsuccessfully) to tear down anyone with >> > > > > > even >> > > > > > modest >> > > > > > achievements in life. How very sad. >> > >> > > > > I see, so you found the ACS Symposium series presentation and >> > > > > publication! Nope, doesn't make me a chemist, nor a seamstress (- >> > > > > ster!) but silk is a material and the work done was in materials >> > > > > science. There is one other publication in a much more >> > > > > significant >> > > > > journal and another presentation at an international >> > > > > conference...I >> > > > > even have a picture of me with everyone at the conference! >> > >> > > > And it sure doesn't make you even remotely anything to do with >> > > > materials >> > > > science. Chemists are always claiming to be "materials scientists", >> > > > because there is more funding there than in their field. Silk is a >> > > > textile, and this was a chemistry proceedings and not peer reviewed >> > > > in >> > > > the accepted way. Sorry - you lose. The other "publications" are >> > > > equally >> > > > bogus. >> > >> > > > > In any event, it remains interesting that you are so consumed by >> > > > > the >> > > > > fact that I have done a bit of work in the area of materials >> > > > > science! >> > >> > > > Sorry, but you have not. I am more interested in the fact that you >> > > > have >> > > > to lie about it, in order to try to run down another academic. >> > > > Doesn;t >> > > > say a lot for your professional ethics, now does it? >> > >> > > You are the once forcing the issue here. I have offered nothing but >> > > what I know. Your opinion is, as usual, meaningless. Materials >> > > science >> > > is what it is, and lots of people get involved at various levels >> > > (which holds true for any such areas). That the fact I have done some >> > > materials science research, which to me is no big deal in any sense >> > > at >> > > all, bothers you is both interesting and telling. >> > >> > Yes, but you are the one that claimed to know a great deal more than >> > you >> > do about "materials science", and then tried to justify that claim with >> > phony "credentials". And, seeing as you have so conveniently forgotten, >> > your claim was that you had a) attended materials science conferences, >> > and b) published in the materials science journals. Too bad you have >> > not >> > been able to back those claims up so far. >> >> All I claimed was that I published in the field. Nothing more. > > Conference proceedings are not publications, especially when you are > fourth author, or didn't your P&T Committee tell you that? Then there is > the matter of your claim to have attended materials science conferences. > Still missing that one, or are you quietly trying to forget you said > that? Like you quitely forgetting you posted at the turn?
From: MNMikeW on 16 Feb 2010 14:57 "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message news:79cb7496-d790-4e70-8bfd-b8149150ba46(a)x22g2000yqx.googlegroups.com... On Feb 16, 12:09 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > In article > <6565a483-ab23-4eaf-8492-2abf296b7...(a)j31g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > On Feb 15, 6:58 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:23:24 -0500, BAR wrote: > > > > In article <4b7893f6$0$5103$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > > > nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > > > >> You haven't commented on Obama's performance in the recent live > > > >> televised debate. Why is that? Could it be that you're so desperate > > > >> to believe Obama is helpless without a teleprompter that you block > > > >> out all evidence to the contrary? Perhaps your obvious bias is > > > >> influencing your predictions about Obama's favorability ratings. > > > > > Ok, I'll play. It was not a debate. It was a ask a quesiton and > > > > receive an answer session. > > > > Correct. It was actually tougher than a debate. They were lined up > > > with > > > carefully prepared question after carefully prepared question, and > > > they > > > still got nowhere. I am quite certain that the GOP will never invite > > > Obama to a live, unscripted television debate of this type again. > > > I thought Obama sucked in that forum. All he did was deny everything, > > no real rationale given, just deny. Looks good the the choir though, I > > suppose. > > Sunshine, you are pre-conditioned to believe that Obama "sucks" at > anything and everything he does. Wrestling with a pig again. I suppose, especially if you don't read my posts. -------------------------- Yeah, no pre-conditioning with Quark, LOL!
From: MNMikeW on 16 Feb 2010 14:58
"William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-136058.13321416022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article > <426168e1-3d62-4f84-bf59-dfcfb6d47537(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> On Feb 16, 12:30 pm, "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Feb 16, 10:53 am, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > On Feb 15, 7:31 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > > In article <4b79e03e$0$4847$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >> > >> > > > Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:30:40 -0600, MNMikeW wrote: >> > > > > > "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> > > > > >news:4b75eb36$0$5121$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> > > > > >> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:36:08 -0600, MNMikeW wrote: >> > > > > >>> "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> > > > > >>>news:4b749767$0$5110$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> > > > > >>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:21:30 -0600, MNMikeW wrote: >> > > > > >>>>> "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> > > > > >>>>>news:4b748e2c$0$5095$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> > > > > >>>>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:51:42 -0600, MNMikeW wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>> <bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote in message >> > > > > >>>>>>>news:eni8n5d2ni49tgp0j8pd0dc4p0jroki97j(a)4ax.com... >> > > > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:58:12 -0500, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <sof8n5drfaqjkerbbv1ubt2f5ts6ta5...(a)4ax.com>, >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> bkni...(a)conramp.net says... >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:21:44 -0500, BAR >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <sc...(a)you.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <nta8n5p2g17si7haj18qn7kif0vi0k4...(a)4ax.com>, >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> bkni...(a)conramp.net says... >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:04:37 -0500, BAR >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <sc...(a)you.com> >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The TelePrompter "BS" hasn't been wiped off the >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> table. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama has a long way to go before he can claim to >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> be >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> weaned off of the TelePrompter. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cripes Bert. Didn't you see the whipping he gave the >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> repub >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> congressmen, all off the cuff? >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In your dreams only. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Enough so that the Senators don't want to be >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> embarrassed >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> too. >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> They won't subject themselves to such a drubbing. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In your dreams only. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Bert! This has been widely publicized. He offered to >> > > > > >>>>>>>> meet >> > > > > >>>>>>>> with them and they said no, not as a large group, just >> > > > > >>>>>>>> with >> > > > > >>>>>>>> a >> > > > > >>>>>>>> few of the leaders. They obviously don't want a repeat >> > > > > >>>>>>>> of >> > > > > >>>>>>>> the >> > > > > >>>>>>>> representatives' poor showing. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>>> And the only people saying it was a "drubbing" are left >> > > > > >>>>>>> wing >> > > > > >>>>>>> blogs. The meeting they want to have on the 25th is just >> > > > > >>>>>>> as >> > > > > >>>>>>> bogus. Obama has stated he has no plans on starting over >> > > > > >>>>>>> on >> > > > > >>>>>>> healthcare. So whatever proposals are presented by the >> > > > > >>>>>>> Repubs, >> > > > > >>>>>>> they will be rejected. The people want a "do-over" on >> > > > > >>>>>>> this >> > > > > >>>>>>> and >> > > > > >>>>>>> so do most Repubs. Obama will not allow that so basically >> > > > > >>>>>>> it >> > > > > >>>>>>> comes down to nothing more than more Obama Kabuki >> > > > > >>>>>>> theater. >> > >> > > > > >>>>>> Jesus. You guys say you've watched it. Are you all blind, >> > > > > >>>>>> or >> > > > > >>>>>> what? >> > >> > > > > >>>>> We dont have blinders on like you. >> > >> > > > > >>>> No, Mike. According to the ceaseless Fox News narrative, >> > > > > >>>> Obama >> > > > > >>>> is >> > > > > >>>> helpless without a teleprompter. He debated the GOP for over >> > > > > >>>> an >> > > > > >>>> hour, all of them lined up with prepared questions. Not only >> > > > > >>>> did >> > > > > >>>> he >> > > > > >>>> not fall apart, he gave no ground whatsoever. In fact he did >> > > > > >>>> very >> > > > > >>>> well. It's that simple. The entire narrative is ridiculous >> > > > > >>>> and >> > > > > >>>> stupid. >> > >> > > > > >>> I said he did very well. He by no means "drubbed" anyone. >> > >> > > > > >> I'm glad you conceded that much. Most of your fellow travelers >> > > > > >> are >> > > > > >> in >> > > > > >> denial. As for how well he did, I'm 100% certain that the GOP >> > > > > >> will >> > > > > >> never, ever invite Obama to another unscripted live television >> > > > > >> debate. Read into that what you will. >> > >> > > > > > There is nothing Obama does that is unscripted. >> > >> > > > > Really. So at the recent GOP debate he, what, somehow got hold of >> > > > > their >> > > > > in advance? Mike, how likely do you think that would have been? >> > >> > > > In PalmPalin's case, guaranteed. And she still couldn't handle it >> > > > without scribbling her "core values" on her palm. >> > >> > > Really? Let's put her political achievements up against your academic >> > > achievements...so you get your D. Phill (doctor phil!) and then you >> > > have done what exactly, that compares to say being elected as a >> > > mayor, >> > > a governor and selected as a VP candidate for one of the major US >> > > parties?- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > > - Show quoted text - >> > >> > You seem to think that being elected to something is a monumental >> > achievement that outshines anything else one might accomplish. You got >> > a Ph.D? Big deal. Sarah Palin got elected Mayor of Wasilla, AK. >> > >> > Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate, the U.S. Senate and >> > the Presidency of the United States. You going to give him the same >> > credit you give Sarah? >> >> Obama is not the issue. Similar record to Palin at the time of the >> 2008 election though. >> >> It's not all that hard to get a Ph.D. More a matter of motivation. >> It's pretty hard to get elected US senator though. > > It's not all that hard to get elected to the US Senate. More a matter of > money. Pretty hard to get a PhD from a good university, though. Too bad you didnt go to one. |