Actually I find it pointless to debate your imagination - E-Stat

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Interesting article. Most of it is over my head but ... - The Real Dick Hertz 17:32:48 03/08/07 (114)

cognitive dissonance - Al Sekela 11:01:06 03/09/07 (0)

It's good, all good. nt - clarkjohnsen 10:24:53 03/09/07 (0)

Hopefully this will provide those who measure the impetus to do so - kerr 04:40:11 03/09/07 (0)

Re: Interesting article. Most of it is over my head but ... - Dan Banquer 04:27:45 03/09/07 (96)

Re: Interesting article. Most of it is over my head but ... - morricab 06:36:37 03/09/07 (72)

Re: Interesting article. Most of it is over my head but ... - Dan Banquer 07:18:51 03/10/07 (67)

Re: Interesting article. Most of it is over my head but ... - morricab 03:11:54 03/11/07 (66)

Ingnorance abounds and your propaganda is baseless. - Dan Banquer 04:38:08 03/12/07 (38)

Re: Ingnorance abounds and your propaganda is baseless. - morricab 08:02:40 03/12/07 (31)

Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 16:12:21 03/12/07 (21)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 13:58:39 03/14/07 (14)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 16:52:57 03/14/07 (13)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 03:31:58 03/15/07 (5)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 13:12:40 03/15/07 (3)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 17:45:44 03/15/07 (1)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 20:23:42 03/15/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 15:11:57 03/15/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 11:17:07 03/15/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 19:50:02 03/14/07 (6)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 03:18:19 03/15/07 (1)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 11:40:53 03/15/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 20:03:02 03/14/07 (3)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 00:07:08 03/15/07 (2)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 03:24:37 03/15/07 (1)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 11:14:47 03/15/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - theaudiohobby 19:02:02 03/13/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - john curl 02:30:31 03/13/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 16:55:55 03/12/07 (3)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - andy_c 17:08:55 03/12/07 (2)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 09:30:56 03/13/07 (0)

Re: Regarding Boyk and Sussman, Cheever, etc. - morricab 03:04:23 03/13/07 (0)

Clueless in Switzerland - Dan Banquer 08:25:57 03/12/07 (8)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - morricab 08:37:59 03/12/07 (7)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - Dan Banquer 09:00:33 03/12/07 (6)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - morricab 10:39:39 03/12/07 (5)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - Dan Banquer 10:54:55 03/12/07 (4)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - morricab 11:10:33 03/12/07 (3)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - Dan Banquer 11:32:12 03/12/07 (2)

Re: Clueless in Switzerland - morricab 14:15:48 03/12/07 (1)

If you want to stick your foot in your mouth........... - Dan Banquer 09:15:03 03/13/07 (1)

P.S. - Dan Banquer 07:30:08 03/12/07 (5)

Re: P.S. - morricab 08:33:11 03/12/07 (4)

Re: P.S. - Dan Banquer 09:25:14 03/12/07 (3)

Re: P.S. - morricab 11:00:47 03/12/07 (2)

Bwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! - Dan Banquer 12:55:39 03/12/07 (1)

Re: Bwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! - morricab 14:05:36 03/12/07 (0)

For some reason, Dan prefers arguing to the wall about what he imagines - E-Stat 20:20:33 03/11/07 (26)

I Imagine nothing. - Dan Banquer 04:40:09 03/12/07 (25)

Right, Dan - E-Stat 06:19:20 03/12/07 (24)

Yes I am right. - Dan Banquer 06:41:31 03/12/07 (23)

You can't even remember what we're talking about! - E-Stat 06:55:55 03/12/07 (22)

You have already demonstrated that you don't have a technical clue! - Dan Banquer 07:36:39 03/12/07 (21)

Re: You have already demonstrated that you don't have a technical clue! - morricab 08:40:54 03/12/07 (5)

Re: You have already demonstrated that you don't have a technical clue! - Dan Banquer 09:03:03 03/12/07 (4)

Correction! - Dan Banquer 09:16:32 03/12/07 (3)

Re: Correction! - morricab 11:15:48 03/12/07 (2)

Re: Correction! - Dan Banquer 12:07:26 03/12/07 (1)

Re: Correction! - morricab 14:46:45 03/12/07 (0)

P.S. - Dan Banquer 08:22:42 03/12/07 (14)

Cite your sources - E-Stat 09:58:46 03/12/07 (13)

Re: Cite your sources - Dan Banquer 10:07:38 03/12/07 (12)

Actually I find it pointless to debate your imagination - E-Stat 10:12:52 03/12/07 (11)

Redundancy is not necessary, Redundancy is not necessary, & Redundancy is not necessary. nt - Dan Banquer 10:22:12 03/12/07 (10)

Fine - E-Stat 10:25:07 03/12/07 (9)

Re: Fine - Dan Banquer 10:40:36 03/12/07 (8)

Sure - E-Stat 10:54:08 03/12/07 (7)

Re: Sure - Dan Banquer 11:06:02 03/12/07 (5)

You first - E-Stat 11:16:10 03/12/07 (4)

Re: You first - Dan Banquer 11:26:37 03/12/07 (3)

I can't take anyone seriously - E-Stat 11:32:26 03/12/07 (2)

I'm learning :) - Dan Banquer 12:02:53 03/12/07 (1)

The lack of substantiation for your claims so noted (nt) - E-Stat 12:28:45 03/12/07 (0)

Re: Sure - Dan Banquer 10:57:57 03/12/07 (0)

Hard to argue - Jim Austin 07:09:59 03/09/07 (3)

Re: Hard to argue - john curl 01:12:06 03/10/07 (1)

Sorry, I don't get your meaning - Jim Austin 03:39:58 03/10/07 (0)

Re: Hard to argue - morricab 09:47:01 03/09/07 (0)

This interpretation is much too simple - Jim Austin 06:29:42 03/09/07 (22)

Re: This interpretation is much too simple - Dan Banquer 09:14:30 03/09/07 (13)

...and your point is? - Jim Austin 09:25:43 03/09/07 (12)

Re: ...and your point is? - Dan Banquer 09:57:59 03/09/07 (11)

Okay, I get it - Jim Austin 10:13:24 03/09/07 (10)

Re: Okay, I get it - john curl 02:39:27 03/10/07 (7)

I used Horowitz and Hill... - Jim Austin 03:41:36 03/10/07 (6)

Re: I used Horowitz and Hill... - john curl 10:49:42 03/10/07 (5)

This book looks interestin - Jim Austin 09:16:08 03/11/07 (1)

Re: This book looks interestin - john curl 12:00:48 03/11/07 (0)

Re: I used Horowitz and Hill... - Jim Austin 14:13:22 03/10/07 (2)

Re: I used Horowitz and Hill... - john curl 17:10:23 03/10/07 (1)

Re: I used Horowitz and Hill... - Jim Austin 18:16:43 03/10/07 (0)

Re: Okay, I get it - Dan Banquer 10:23:18 03/09/07 (1)

Maybe I shouldn't say this... - Jim Austin 10:33:23 03/09/07 (0)

Re: This interpretation is much too simple - theaudiohobby 06:59:44 03/09/07 (7)

Re: This interpretation is much too simple - morricab 09:48:38 03/09/07 (0)

I don't totally disagree... - Jim Austin 07:06:59 03/09/07 (5)

The problem with numbers... - morricab 09:57:32 03/09/07 (1)

I would only add - Jim Austin 10:09:32 03/09/07 (0)

Re: Well.. - theaudiohobby 07:53:14 03/09/07 (2)

Re: Well.. - Jim Austin 08:05:29 03/09/07 (1)

Re: Well.. - theaudiohobby 08:12:30 03/09/07 (0)

Re: Well, it does address a few issues - theaudiohobby 02:22:18 03/09/07 (3)

Re: Well, it does address a few issues - morricab 06:38:35 03/09/07 (2)

Re: Well, it does address a few issues - AJinFLA 16:16:58 03/09/07 (1)

Re: too funny -nt - theaudiohobby 01:05:35 03/10/07 (0)

Let's hear it for the perverts! (nt) - E-Stat 20:25:36 03/08/07 (8)

And once again................. - Dan Banquer 05:29:46 03/09/07 (6)

I guess we perverts just can't read very well - E-Stat 05:39:03 03/09/07 (5)

Re: I guess we perverts just can't read very well - Dan Banquer 05:52:00 03/09/07 (4)

Re: I guess we perverts just can't read very well - morricab 06:32:07 03/09/07 (0)

I can recommend a good book to improve your memory retention. - E-Stat 06:08:23 03/09/07 (2)

The first step to recovery is................. - Dan Banquer 06:18:06 03/09/07 (1)

Indeed - E-Stat 06:22:30 03/09/07 (0)

Thank you - thank you very much! - kerr 04:42:04 03/09/07 (0)

Uh-oh (nt) - AJinFLA 18:02:47 03/08/07 (0)

Follow Ups

Actually I find it pointless to debate your imagination - E-Stat 10:12:52 03/12/07 (11)

Redundancy is not necessary, Redundancy is not necessary, & Redundancy is not necessary. nt - Dan Banquer 10:22:12 03/12/07 (10)

Fine - E-Stat 10:25:07 03/12/07 (9)

Re: Fine - Dan Banquer 10:40:36 03/12/07 (8)

Sure - E-Stat 10:54:08 03/12/07 (7)

Re: Sure - Dan Banquer 11:06:02 03/12/07 (5)

You first - E-Stat 11:16:10 03/12/07 (4)

Re: You first - Dan Banquer 11:26:37 03/12/07 (3)

I can't take anyone seriously - E-Stat 11:32:26 03/12/07 (2)

I'm learning :) - Dan Banquer 12:02:53 03/12/07 (1)

The lack of substantiation for your claims so noted (nt) - E-Stat 12:28:45 03/12/07 (0)

Re: Sure - Dan Banquer 10:57:57 03/12/07 (0)