It Came From The New York Times - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

Notice: session_start(): ps_files_cleanup_dir: opendir(/var/lib/php5) failed: Permission denied (13) in /home/astro/websites/astronomynet/htdocs/sitewide.php on line 4 It Came From The New York Times - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

God & Science Forum Message
Forums:	Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

It Came From The New York Times

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on December 19, 2001 15:04:14 UTC

Front page. While discussing the marines that crawled through a mine field to comfort a marine who lost a foot to a mine, the article said that only the first names of the brave marines could be written and that that was the policy of the Department of Defense.

You have been an anti-communist for so long that you have adopted their vocabulary. They still arrest persons on disinformation charges in China. Or will you call that disinformation. Life is so easy when you do not know anything. I have yet to see you write anything that displayed any knowledge on your part. You must know something. But you do not show it.

When I had Star Wars contracts with the US Army, I encountered the same behavior with the contract monitors. They were rather uniformly not as well versed in science as the contractors they monitored. So they did what is called, "Coming on dumb". They pretended not to know anything at all, so as not to give away what they actually did know; and would then hopefully catch the contractor saying something incorrect.

But I had already been trained at Harvard to watch out for that tactic. When explaining your theory to a Professor they invariably would say that they did not understand it. So you would continue explaining. But it always turned out that they saw into your theory further than you and saw some inconsistency or contradiction. So they were actually saying that they did not understand how your theory could be correct. But of course that's disinformation for you. You could never benefit from knowing that.

Follow Ups:

you call me anti-comm' I'm for competence,not dumb simple answe - spazcon - December 19, 2001 - 22:08 UTC
In what way was it in reference to this forum, then? - spazcon - December 19, 2001 - 22:12 UTC
All secret information agencies are in disinformation biz too - spazcon - December 19, 2001 - 22:13 UTC
- You are not making sense(nt) - yanniru - December 20, 2001 - 14:24 UTC
  - NT - spazcon - December 20, 2001 - 22:18 UTC
    - NT - yanniru - December 20, 2001 - 23:52 UTC
      - I know you're not just mad at me - spazcon - December 21, 2001 - 00:21 UTC
        
        You are fun - yanniru - December 21, 2001 - 14:16 UTC
        
        your knowledge of me is sopht - carefuluniverse - December 21, 2001 - 20:47 UTC
        
        I recall that you responded to the label - yanniru - December 22, 2001 - 16:38 UTC
        
        you da silliest guy ever? - spazcon - December 22, 2001 - 19:00 UTC
        
        Finally some information - yanniru - December 23, 2001 - 19:03 UTC
        
        so "bluffing" is something you stand behind - carefuluniverse - December 24, 2001 - 00:07 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins