On Jul 31, 4:02 am, dh@. wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 03:45:55 -0700, Rupert > wrote:
> >On Jul 29, 7:28 am, Kickin' Goober's Faggot Ass
> > wrote:
> >> On Jul 28, 9:24 am, Rupert > wrote:
>
> >> > On Jul 29, 1:10 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>
> >> > > Rupert wrote:
> >> > > > On Jul 29, 12:58 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> > > >> Rupert wrote:
> >> > > >>> On Jul 28, 3:22 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> > > >>>> Guppy the Corpse Pumper wrote:
> >> > > >>>>> On Jul 27, 2:08 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>> On Jul 27, 12:52 pm, shrubkiller > wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>> On Jul 27, 1:42 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>> rupie, you lisping fruit: you assert that (non-human)
> >> > > >>>>>>>> animals are due equal moral consideration (compared
> >> > > >>>>>>>> with humans). You haven't established that. Get busy,
> >> > > >>>>>>>> you lisping utilitarian fruit.
> >> > > >>>>>>> Why would anyone have to prove something which is SELF EVIDENT?
> >> > > >>>>>> It is not self-evident. In fact, it is more likely self-evidently
> >> > > >>>>>> false.
> >> > > >>>>> More proof that
> >> > > >>>> The proposition of equal moral considerability of
> >> > > >>>> animals (with humans) is self evidently false.
> >> > > >>> Well, surely if I can be criticized for making an assertion without
> >> > > >>> meeting by burden of proof, then this assertion of yours here can
> >> > > >>> equally be criticized on that basis.
> >> > > >> I'm just following your lead.
>
> >> > > > I see. Well, that blabber of mine to which I directed you
>
> >> > > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> > So, may I take it that you have no cogent criticisms to make of my
> >> > talk?
>
> >> You're kidding, right?
>
> >> Goo will dismiss your talk entirely without having read or heard it.
>
> >> Only Goo is wise.
>
> >> Only Goo knows.
>
> >Yes, I've often thought how great it would be to know everything, like
> >him. Like the way he knows that all the male activists at Animal
> >Liberation, including me, are queer, and the way he knows that the
> >mathematical paper I'm working on is rubbish, and the way he knows
> >that I'm seething with rage at him as opposed to roaring with
> >laughter,
>
> Since the Goober makes up whatever he wants, and never
> even tries to back up his absurd claims, he presents what he
> considers to be an intelligent character when the reality is that
> he's very clearly just a liar.
>
> >and the way he knows that I'm the one who exhibits symptoms
> >of psychosis, and so much more. Imagine knowing so much.
>
> "Knowing"? "Much"? When considering dishonesty to the
> extreme of the Goobal level, it always leads to the question:
>
> How much of his absurdity is the Goober himself stupid enough
> to believe?
>

Yes, I certainly often wonder about that myself. It really is quite
mind-boggling.