While intrepidly exploring the bowels of USENET on Thursday, August
14, 2008, rolled initiative and posted the
following:

> On Aug 13, 7:38*pm, Derek > wrote:
>
>>>> I have gone to great effort to have a civil discussion, and have
>>>> avoided intentional insult in response to replies I don't like.
>>
>>> Short memory.
>>
>> Actually, it's rather long. I inherited my father's ability to hold
>> grudges.
>
> I see that. Too bad he didn't give you a few "just answer the
> question" genes. And where did you get your ADD gene from?

Considering that you're argument in this discussion has wandered
through various ideas rather than staying focused, I'd like to suggest
that you stay away from accusations of ADD.

>>> Oh contrar, you've yet to answer one of my questions. I'll try one
>>> last time. What's in the balloon after the water is allowed to strain
>>> off?
>>
>> You're avoiding the issue. I never suggested that someone reading this
>> group doesn't have the brains to be insulted. Care to guess who wrote
>> that statement and to whom it was directed?
>
> Truth hurts huh. One insult? Want me to got back and log all the
> others thrown at me? I don't have the time.

I am not responsible for what others have "thrown" at you. Neither
does the misbehavior of others taint my response.

>> If you strain the condensed water out of the balloon, you've got an
>> empty balloon. But even that isn't the answer to your question about
>> why only 5% of the water remains.
>
> No, the balloon was still full. Can't you read or is it your short
> term memory at work?

Then we're talking about two different experiments. If you've actually
read what I wrote, you could have noted this already.

>> I answered that question. Whether or not you can be bothered to read
>> my answer is up to you.
>
> I did, and nope, not even a half effort. Straight "Fs". Good work.

If I was wrong, then tell me why. Repeatedly declaring that my
description is incorrect doesn't make it true.

I'm willing to admit being wrong when it's proven so. Declaring it to
be so, however, isn't proof.

> Like I said, I'll wait for someone else to handle a man's job.
> Evidently not too many who have read this thread disagree with me.

Silence from others does not prove their agreement with you. In fact,
the only comments posted by others in the discussion between you and I
have been disparaging of you, not of me.

--
Derek

A rolling stone gathers momentum.