From: damarkley@gmail.com   
      
   On Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 5:56:09 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   > On 22-Feb-23 11:21 pm, Dean Markley wrote:    
   > > On Tuesday, February 21, 2023 at 1:07:30 PM UTC-5, Snidely wrote:    
   > >> On Tuesday or thereabouts, Dean Markley declared ...    
   > >>> On Monday, February 20, 2023 at 11:17:13 AM UTC-5, Doctor Who wrote:    
   > >>>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 07:45:32 -0800 (PST), Dean Markley    
   > >>>>  wrote:    
   > >>>>    
   > >>>>> On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 9:46:44 AM UTC-5, Doctor Who wrote:    
   > >>>>>> On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 04:34:54 -0800 (PST), Dean Markley    
   > >>>>>>  wrote:    
   > >>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>> On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 7:21:01 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else   
   wrote:    
   > >>>>>>>> On 17-Feb-23 12:20 am, Doctor Who wrote:    
   > >>>>>>>>> You eat dry forage.    
   > >>>>>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>>>> and lallo    
   > >>>>>>>> I like donkeys. They're cute.    
   > >>>>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>>> Sylvia.    
   > >>>>>>> You are correct Sylvia, donkeys are cute. Asses on the other   
   hand....    
   > >>>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>> So, Mr. Who (I'm not going to call you Dr. for obvious reasons), why   
   are    
   > >>>>>>> you trolling so hard?    
   > >>>>>> I am the Doctor.    
   > >>>>> Answer my question.    
   > >>>> you don't take us seriously from the start, that's why you are    
   > >>>> donkeys, you just live with standard physics, you don't know more.    
   > >>>    
   > >>> No because if you were serious, you certainly wouldn't be arguing in a   
   Google    
   > >>> Group.    
   > >> Well, technically, it's not a Google Group, it's a usenet newsgroup,    
   > >> and it exists on servers outside of Google, and is just mirrored by    
   > >> Google.    
   > >>    
   > >> On the other hand, there's no one here representing either investors    
   > >> nor people whose validation of the equipment would carry any weight in    
   > >> the real world.    
   > >>    
   > >> /dps    
   > >>    
   > >> --    
   > >> There's nothing inherently wrong with Big Data. What matters, as it    
   > >> does for Arnold Lund in California or Richard Rothman in Baltimore, are    
   > >> the questions -- old and new, good and bad -- this newest tool lets us    
   > >> ask. (R. Lerhman, CSMonitor.com)    
   > >    
   > > Yes, thank you for the correction. But you amplified my point which I also   
   appreciate. Why is this guy trying so hard in here? It's really not the place   
   to try if you are serious.   
   > The guy did get some traction (as distinct from thrust) at one point,    
   > with NASA investigating (why they would spend money on that in the    
   > absence of clear evidence that it works, I do not know).    
   >    
   > Perhaps completely unmoderated groups are now the only slightly relevant    
   > places he can post to about it.    
   >    
   > Sylvia.   
      
   I must agree.  If this group were moderated, he would have been banned long   
   ago.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)