Nucular, on the other hand, he might let past.Wow, what a brilliant piece of politic
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:Please ignore - wrong thread.
Nucular, on the other hand, he might let past.Wow, what a brilliant piece of politic
On Fri, 02 Feb 2024 15:01:14 +1300, Mutley wrote:Jeez - do you ever discuss anything that matters?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
Nucular, on the other hand, he might let past.
I hope he does. This countries kept it's head in the sand over
Nuclear power long enough.
But he seems to be talking Nucular, instead.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:Would that be a Nucular lesson, Tony?
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:It does, and I got it perfectly - you assumed, incorrectly, that you inderstood
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
the meaning, you didn't, I did.
And such a simple bit of English too.
Sad really.
But there is a lesson in it - I hope you learned that.
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:It does, and I got it perfectly - you assumed, incorrectly, that you inderstood the meaning, you didn't, I did.
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:25:31 -0000 (UTC), TonyI see your English has not improved.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:Would that be a Nucular lesson, Tony?
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:It does, and I got it perfectly - you assumed, incorrectly, that you >>inderstood
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
the meaning, you didn't, I did.
And such a simple bit of English too.
Sad really.
But there is a lesson in it - I hope you learned that.
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:No. I know what it means and that knowledge has nothing to do with the argument.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
It does ...
Explain 1) what it means, and 2) how that proves your argument.
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:Correct. But I see you are struggling to comprehend, no real surprise.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
It does ...
Explain 1) what it means, and 2) how that proves your argument.
No. I know what it means and that knowledge has nothing to do with the
argument.
So I wonder why you brought it up? I’m sure the reason is “self-evident” >in your head ...
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:Correct. But I see you are struggling to comprehend, no real surprise.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
It does ...
Explain 1) what it means, and 2) how that proves your argument.
No. I know what it means and that knowledge has nothing to do with the
argument.
So I wonder why you brought it up? I’m sure the reason is “self-evident�?
in your head ...
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 22:00:08 -0000 (UTC), TonySelf evidently you did not understand it because I did.
<[email protected]> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:33:20 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:Correct. But I see you are struggling to comprehend, no real surprise.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:25:31 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:21:38 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
"self-evident" fooled you I recall.
No, you were the one fooled into believing it meant something.
It does ...
Explain 1) what it means, and 2) how that proves your argument.
No. I know what it means and that knowledge has nothing to do with the >>>> argument.
So I wonder why you brought it up? I’m sure the reason is >>>“self-evident�?
in your head ...
An example may be useful. Self-evidently, Tony did not understand the >question or e would have answered it.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 30:32:57 |
| Calls: | 12,108 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,261 |