Re: [Fwd: Re: American Hebrew]

Anthony R. Woodcock (arwoodco@mtu.edu)
Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:25:35 -0500 (EST)

Very foolish, no they have not. I will give an example of the
crap that magizine publishs...soon. Let me go get an article and rip it
to shreds for you(constructively criticize it). You must be patient
though. Do you know what an innuendo is? or a fascination? Believe me I
will tear the article I choose to shreads. You will say to yourself oops,
or you will write me off as Till has in the past(as a person that is
unlearned, mainly because you do not agree with me). You still haven't
answered any of what I said in my last email messages, are you taking the
path of writing me off? Are you going to ignore what I said on DNA? I
will look at the Scientific American magizine, you try to show some
natural way that EVEN one DNA strand could be formed. Obviously you and
Till are on the same wavelength. Do you want me to proofread everything I
write to you? Make sure I have complete sentences? I do not see any good
reason to do it, so long as you understand what I am writing.

I can write better than this if I feel inclined to do so.

I do not like your put downs, but If I be reproached for the name of
Christ happy am I, for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon me; on
their part He is evil spoken of, on my part He is glorified.(paraphrase:
1 Peter 4:14).

On Thu, 20 Mar 1997, Michael Fisher wrote:

> A real live person who claims to be a college student wrote the
> following:
>
> I have read some of those Scientific American. What most of that is a
> bunch of fascinations. They do not really present facts, but they do
> present a lot of major innuendo biases. Neither of those two animals are
> proof, I am pretty sure.
>
> MWF
> Wow.
>
> What can I say? Is that English? It looks like a collection of
> mostly English words but:
>
> What are "fascinations"?
>
> What's an "innuendo bias"?
>
> Sci Am may not be "Nature" or the JAAAS, but it has certainly
> done a pretty fair job of presenting facts in its articles for so long
> as I've been reading it, which I must admit is over twenty years now. It
> just doesn't dive quite so deep into the math as a "genuine" scientific
> paper does.
>
> Tony, one last time:
>
> Try to prove me wrong.
>
I will. There are so many innuendos between the lines....You will
see.

> MWF
> Heck, if I cut your heart out and your head off, pureed your
> heart and then boiled your head in the puree, and served it all
> back---you'd never even notice.
>
> How can I prove anything to someone so thorougly illiterate,
> ignorant and incapable of rational thought??
>
> In wonderment (which word IS in the dictionary);
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Fisher, ET1/SS USN ret., law student
>
> http://home.aol.com/Mfish6994
>
> * * *
>
> He that would make his own liberty secure,
> must guard even his enemy from oppression;
> for if he violates this duty,
> he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
>
> Thomas Paine
>

A servant in Christ,

Tony Woodcock.