Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #591118

Re: Gravity and light question

Show all headers | View raw

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 7/27/2016 5:15 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 7/27/2016 11:36 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> So will you please stop making your “web designer” (I am not one, I
>>>> work as a *software* *developer* with expertise in Web _development_)
>>>> “and Star Trek fanboy” (I am not one, I am a Star Trek follower)
>>>> argument? Not only is it fallacious, it is getting old.  TIA.
>>>>
>>>>> […] As far as I'm concerned, your credentials and right to claim level
>>>>> [of understanding are no better than mine.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I did not claim anything.  However, there is more professional
>>>> physics in my life than you know.  I would gladly tell you the details,
>>>> but unfortunately you have shown that you cannot be trusted.
>>> Trusted with what?
>> Personal information.
> 
> Which YOU have exposed PUBLICLY. So why would you expect this
> information to be held closely in a trust basis?

I expect personal information that I disclosed, publicly or not, which has 
nothing to do with the matter, to not be used against me, however futilely, 
by a trustworthy person and reasonable individual.  Since you did that and 
keep doing that, I do not consider you trustworthy at least.  So I will 
withhold any further details about my life, even though they would certainly 
be in my favor, from you, until you have proven by your actions that you are 
trustworthy in that regard.

>>> I've presented nothing other than what you have presented YOURSELF.
>>
>> You really need it spelt out for you?  OK.  You have showed that you
>> cannot be trusted _not_ to misuse personal information to try (and fail,
>> see above; but that is beside the point) to gain an advantage.
> 
> I'll repeat something you apparently did not read or did not retain. I
> am not claiming advantage. I am disclaiming DISadvantage.

And because you are doing that based on wrong informationn, irrelevant 
information if corrected, and incomplete information, about a person,
that is your fallacy.

EOD

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-26 21:36 +0200
  Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 15:05 -0500
    Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-27 18:36 +0200
      Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 13:08 -0500
        Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-28 00:15 +0200
          Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:24 -0500
            Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-29 07:05 +0200
  i.q at most zero noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:19 -0700
    Light (was: i.q at most zero) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-29 07:16 +0200
      Re: Light (was: i.q at most zero) LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 22:34 -0700
        see _Light, a history: Fermat's complete correspondence on light_ noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:38 -0700
          Re: see _Light, a history: Fermat's complete correspondence on light_ brandonahenley9@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 12:38 -0700

csiph-web