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

Groups > sci.physics > #605734 > unrolled thread

Odd too stupid to talk to

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 11:27 -0800
    Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 11:57 -0800
    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-21 12:03 -0800
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 13:28 -0800
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-21 22:06 -0800
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-22 17:36 -0500
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 07:17 -0600
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 06:13 -0800
            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 06:23 -0800
    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-21 21:50 +0000
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 15:39 -0800
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-21 19:12 -0500
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-22 01:45 +0000
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-22 16:56 -0500
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 18:46 -0800
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-22 17:27 -0500
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 11:50 -0600
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 10:26 -0800
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-22 10:50 -0800
            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-24 10:33 -0800
              Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-11-24 15:36 -0800
              Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-25 12:59 -0800
                Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-26 11:34 -0800
                  Re: Odd too stupid to talk to The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-11-28 10:50 -0800
                    curvature of space not global necesserily noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 11:07 -0800
                      like  t.h.i.s noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-05 18:45 -0800
                        t.h.a.t, like this noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-06 12:45 -0800
          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-25 00:54 -0800
            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-11-25 15:04 -0800
              Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-26 20:02 -0500
                Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-06 03:55 -0800
                  Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-06 17:52 -0500
                    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 04:19 -0800
                      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 09:33 -0800
                        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 17:44 -0800
                      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 18:07 -0500
                        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 17:48 -0800
                          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 19:35 -0800
                            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 19:45 -0800
                              Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 09:23 -0800
                                can I not call you, -nesS noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 15:48 -0800
                                  can I not call you, -nesS john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 21:13 -0800
                                    can I not call you, -nesS HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 04:12 -0800
                                      can I not call you, -nesS john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 07:23 -0800
                                        can I not call you, -nesS HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 11:22 -0800
                                          Re: can I not call you, -nesS noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 12:51 -0800
                                          Re: can I not call you, -nesS benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 18:52 -0500
                                            Re: can I not call you, -nesS xxein1@att.net - 2016-12-09 16:50 -0800
                                              Re: Gravity is "eXergy" ( energy that can do work ). xxein1@att.net - 2016-12-10 12:28 -0800
                                            Re: can I not call you, -nesS HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 16:54 -0800
                                              Re: can I not call you, -nesS xxein1@att.net - 2016-12-09 20:37 -0800
                                                Re: We're robots.  Nature programmed us to play games. xxein1@att.net - 2016-12-10 12:49 -0800
                                              Re: can I not call you, -nesS benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 17:59 -0500
                                                two letters noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 19:03 -0800
                                      Re: can I not call you, -nesS benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 18:46 -0500
                                        Re: can I not call you, -nesS HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 16:52 -0800
                          Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 18:06 -0500
                            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 16:44 -0800
                            Re: Odd too stupid to talk to HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 16:48 -0800
                              Re: Odd too stupid to talk to benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 17:52 -0500
    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-11-21 22:10 -0800
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-22 01:07 -0800
    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-22 01:00 -0800
    Re: Odd too stupid to talk to kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-22 07:19 -0800
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 07:41 -0800
        Re: Odd too stupid to talk to moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-22 17:38 +0000
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-22 08:38 -0800
      Re: Odd too stupid to talk to poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-25 00:43 -0800

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#605734 — Odd too stupid to talk to

This Odd fellow is just too stupid
to talk to.
But he thinks he knows it all.
"Why does a thing need to be made of
something", he asks?

Well, little Odd, if we take ALL your cells
and fluids away, where will you be?
Answer- just where we want you:
gone.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#605750

john
This Odd fellow is just too stupid 
to talk to. 
But he thinks he knows it all. 
"Why does a thing need to be made of 
something", he asks? 
-----------

It's a reasonable question that your never answer. Why? Because you have no answer. He's right and you can't double talk your way out

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605754

john wrote:
> 
> This Odd fellow is just too stupid
> to talk to.
> But he thinks he knows it all.
> "Why does a thing need to be made of
> something", he asks?


 a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605783

Ace said
" a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing. "

actually, a "thing" is made from its "parts".
Oddstupid and HVACstupid think
things don't need parts.
Stupid and stubborn.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605851

john wrote:
> 
> Ace said
> " a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing. "
> 
> actually, a "thing" is made from its "parts".
> Oddstupid and HVACstupid think
> things don't need parts.
> Stupid and stubborn.


whereas nothing is made of nothing because it is no thing..no thing to
thing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606008

On 11/22/2016 1:06 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> john wrote:
>>
>> Ace said
>> " a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing. "
>>
>> actually, a "thing" is made from its "parts".
>> Oddstupid and HVACstupid think
>> things don't need parts.
>> Stupid and stubborn.
>
>
> whereas nothing is made of nothing because it is no thing..no thing to
> thing.
>
Starfaker you are such a genius.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605881

On 11/21/2016 3:28 PM, john wrote:
> Ace said
> " a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing. "
>
> actually, a "thing" is made from its "parts".
> Oddstupid and HVACstupid think
> things don't need parts.

Some things do, some things don't.

You believe everything must have parts, but for the LIFE OF YOU you 
can't seem to explain why you think that's so.

Maybe instead of repeating what you believe over and over and over 
again, you could concentrate on answering the question WHY you believe 
what you do.....

> Stupid and stubborn.

It's not stupid or stubborn to not believe what you believe but can't 
say why.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605896

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 8:17:53 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 3:28 PM, john wrote:
> > Ace said
> > " a thing is not made of something, it is made of some thing. "
> >
> > actually, a "thing" is made from its "parts".
> > Oddstupid and HVACstupid think
> > things don't need parts.
> 
> Some things do, some things don't.

The whole is the sum of its parts. Often it's a product.

Look MaJi, I too can can play short sentenced word games. No hands!

> You believe everything must have parts, but for the LIFE OF YOU you 
> can't seem to explain why you think that's so.

Why do you Odd keep asking this ridiculus question why Why WHY?! Grow up.

Why is a circle round? Why is a plane not a plain? ...Why why WHY?!

> Maybe instead of repeating what you believe over and over and over 
> again, you could concentrate on answering the question WHY you believe 
> what you do.....

Why not you Odd just ignore all GEICO commercials as well? Why?!

> > Stupid and stubborn.
> 
> It's not stupid or stubborn to not believe what you believe but can't 
> say why.

What?! You who? In English next time, please. Tia.

Someone, get this message to Odd, I'm apparently on his scientific
must-not-read-list. Don't know why. Don't ask either. Regardless,
Odd's contents demonstrate he reads my posts more than he admits to.

The message is this... STFU Odd and stop asking other people what they
believe or why they believe it! Everyone believes what they do due to
their personal life experiences/expectations. Duh!

Lesson? Newborns have no beliefs whatsoever, beliefs are an acquired desease.

Consequence? I, for one, truly believe that lesson.

> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

From where can I order one of your fine toys, Odd? Show your set of fine tools.

-- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: d(me) != 0 ... me alwa(y)s changes...”

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605897

Mahipal
"
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables 

From where can I order one of your fine toys, Odd? Show your set of fine tools. "

What tools do you make, Odd?
Got pictures?
Do you metal work?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605788

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>This Odd fellow is just too stupid
>to talk to.
>But he thinks he knows it all.
>"Why does a thing need to be made of
>something", he asks?

It seems to be a rather reasonable question. Why won't you answer it
for him?

>Well, little Odd, if we take ALL your cells
>and fluids away, where will you be?
>Answer- just where we want you:
>gone.

Just because Odd is made of cells and fluids doesn't mean everything
is.  A rock isn't.  I know you happen to believe everything is made
of something, ad infinitum, turtles all the way down, but that does
not answer Odd's question *why* do you believe that.  Why do you consider
asking such a question as "stupid"?  Another question is why do you
avoid answering such questions?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605805

Michael
Why do you believe "something "-
anything- can still exist with
no structure?
How long does a cloud last?

Do you know what "amorphous" means?

Why, MM, why????????????????(OMG)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605810

On 11/21/2016 4:50 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> This Odd fellow is just too stupid
>> to talk to.
>> But he thinks he knows it all.
>> "Why does a thing need to be made of
>> something", he asks?
>
> It seems to be a rather reasonable question. Why won't you answer it
> for him?
>
>> Well, little Odd, if we take ALL your cells
>> and fluids away, where will you be?
>> Answer- just where we want you:
>> gone.
>
> Just because Odd is made of cells and fluids doesn't mean everything
> is.  A rock isn't.  I know you happen to believe everything is made
> of something, ad infinitum, turtles all the way down, but that does
> not answer Odd's question *why* do you believe that.  Why do you consider
> asking such a question as "stupid"?  Another question is why do you
> avoid answering such questions?
>
So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation 
you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a 
picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is 
defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity 
that has properties.

For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing" 
and must be "something".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605821

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 4:50 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> This Odd fellow is just too stupid
>>> to talk to.
>>> But he thinks he knows it all.
>>> "Why does a thing need to be made of
>>> something", he asks?
>>
>> It seems to be a rather reasonable question. Why won't you answer it
>> for him?
>>
>>> Well, little Odd, if we take ALL your cells
>>> and fluids away, where will you be?
>>> Answer- just where we want you:
>>> gone.
>>
>> Just because Odd is made of cells and fluids doesn't mean everything
>> is.  A rock isn't.  I know you happen to believe everything is made
>> of something, ad infinitum, turtles all the way down, but that does
>> not answer Odd's question *why* do you believe that.  Why do you consider
>> asking such a question as "stupid"?  Another question is why do you
>> avoid answering such questions?
>>
> So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation 
> you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a 
> picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is 
> defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity 
> that has properties.
> 
> For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing" 
> and must be "something".

entity: a thing with distinct and independent existence.

If nothing has no properties it can not be an entity.

Is English your first language?


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606000

On 11/21/2016 8:45 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com babbled:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 11/21/2016 4:50 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> This Odd fellow is just too stupid
>>>> to talk to.
>>>> But he thinks he knows it all.
>>>> "Why does a thing need to be made of
>>>> something", he asks?
>>>
>>> It seems to be a rather reasonable question. Why won't you answer it
>>> for him?
>>>
>>>> Well, little Odd, if we take ALL your cells
>>>> and fluids away, where will you be?
>>>> Answer- just where we want you:
>>>> gone.
>>>
>>> Just because Odd is made of cells and fluids doesn't mean everything
>>> is.  A rock isn't.  I know you happen to believe everything is made
>>> of something, ad infinitum, turtles all the way down, but that does
>>> not answer Odd's question *why* do you believe that.  Why do you consider
>>> asking such a question as "stupid"?  Another question is why do you
>>> avoid answering such questions?
>>>
>> So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation
>> you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a
>> picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is
>> defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity
>> that has properties.
>>
>> For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing"
>> and must be "something".
>
> entity: a thing with distinct and independent existence.
>
> If nothing has no properties it can not be an entity.
>
> Is English your first language?

Snarky comments aside, I actually was wondering about using that word 
for that reason but didn't come up with a better one. I'm thinking 
"concept" might be better for "nothing".

Websters defines Entity as: b :  the existence of a thing as contrasted 
with its attributes

So the absence of attributes does not negate an "entity". You do know 
what a dictionary is, right? Can you read? You and HVAC went to the same 
school, right? Fist bump?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605829

BJ quacked
So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation 
you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a 
picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is 
defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity 
that has properties. 

For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing" 
and must be "something". 
--------

Of course. It's space. QED 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606003

On 11/21/2016 9:46 PM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation
> you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a
> picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is
> defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity
> that has properties.
>
> For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing"
> and must be "something".
> --------
>
> Of course. It's space. QED
>
I'm glad you agree space is "something". I like to call that something 
"aether". You can call it "space" or "spacetime" if you choose. Freedom 
of the press and all.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605944

On 11/21/2016 6:12 PM, benj wrote:
> So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation
> you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a
> picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is
> defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity
> that has properties.
>
> For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing"
> and must be "something".

Completely agree. I know no scientist who would claim that empty space 
is "nothing at all".

Nor do I know any scientist that would claim that an electron with no 
volume or structure but has other properties is "nothing at all".

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605958

OddPDTheWiz
"
Completely agree. I know no scientist who would claim that empty space 
is "nothing at all". 

Nor do I know any scientist that would claim that an electron with no 
volume or structure but has other properties is "nothing at all". 
"
Electrons have structure.
Otherwise they wouldn't exist.
How have you not been hit by a bus?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#605963

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 12:50:51 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 6:12 PM, benj wrote:
> > So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation
> > you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a
> > picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is
> > defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity
> > that has properties.
> >
> > For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing"
> > and must be "something".
> 
> Completely agree. I know no scientist who would claim that empty space 
> is "nothing at all".

By definition: Einstein's SR empty space means "nothing at all".....the need  for an aether is superfluous (sp?).
> 
> Nor do I know any scientist that would claim that an electron with no 
> volume or structure but has other properties is "nothing at all".
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#606350

kenseto wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 12:50:51 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > On 11/21/2016 6:12 PM, benj wrote:
> > > So you think that asserting that "nothing" is "something" is an equation
> > > you believe in? Is English your first language? Here, let me draw a
> > > picture so eve you can understand it if Odd never can: "Nothing" is
> > > defined as and entity having no properties. "Something" is an entity
> > > that has properties.
> > >
> > > For example empty space has properties. Therefore it cannot be "nothing"
> > > and must be "something".
> >
> > Completely agree. I know no scientist who would claim that empty space
> > is "nothing at all".
> 
> By definition: Einstein's SR empty space means "nothing at all".....the need  for an aether is superfluous (sp?).
> >
> > Nor do I know any scientist that would claim that an electron with no
> > volume or structure but has other properties is "nothing at all".
> >
> > --
> > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables



you guys need my genuis help...

all things are made of atoms

but not all of the universe contain ...things.


maybe only a few percent contain ...anythings.


Nothing has...no things.

no things have no atoms.


Now, i don't want to go above your level of understanding
and explain to you what is contained in ....else...
in the 'no-thing'...it's just...else.

Maybe...just...thoughts.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web