"Though I tried a fast rep of 25 pull ups [chortle] and started getting
some chest pressure at 20 [chortle], yesterday. I cant do more than
about 5 one handed pull ups anymore..sigh..old age is creeping up."

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!ms...o/rOC-Y63ENh8J

A scant three years later:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...22097241260450


gummer has never done even a single one-handed pullup, of course.
gummer has never been able to do 25 pullups. At age 53, 210 lb, gummer
couldn't do *one* two-handed pullup.

Do you think he ever considers how ludicrous his claims will sound? Or
is it more like the motorcycle record, where he knows so little about
his subject that he hasn't a clue how high a number to make up?

That's something I've said to him many times: "If you're going to lie -
and you are - at least tell *plausible* lies."

OR, you could say, Iffin yer gonna lie, tell the BIGGEST ****ing whopper you can think of!
For which, I might add, 5 1-armed pullups qualifies!!! LOL!!!

And maybe.... just maybe... Gummer says this **** to see who's paying attention. I do this myself, but on a slightly different level, and it's very inneresting. Sometimes I'll make an mistake in a technical argerment, that I don't bother to correct, or sometimes I'll just be deliberately sloppy, to see who really knows wtf is going on out there.
99% of the time, the chest-thumping assholes don't catch it, and I then know who is fulla****.

Like how Steve W. caught the rabidly blind Kidding in his ignerince of early/radio internet. Priceless!!!
And none of you ****wads would have known the fukn diff, had Steve W. not spoken up. dicklessKidding had all you dumb****s fooled.

dickless Kidding is the REAL fraud, along with Ig****, The Grand Parasitizer of RCM.
Dickless handwaves like he knows everything about everything, but, to my knowledge, hasn't contributed 1 mg of metalworking content to RCM.
Ig**** HAS contributed a gram or two, but mostly cuz you cocksuckers swing from Ig****'s parasitizing dick every time he posts for Free Bidniss Advice..

And neither of these knowitall dumb****s had **** to say about my Theorem of FatBurning (the more complete version is on rec.running), bec when it comes down to hard knowledge, they are just skating on other people's knowledge, whilst trying to tear people down.

You dumb****s should be enjoying Gummer's tales. Learn to read between the ****ing lines, once in a while. Meanwhile, Gummer has actually contributed more to this ng than 98% of the dumb****s here.

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

On 7/28/2015 6:49 PM, Grokman Grokman wrote:

"Though I tried a fast rep of 25 pull ups [chortle] and started getting
some chest pressure at 20 [chortle], yesterday. I cant do more than
about 5 one handed pull ups anymore..sigh..old age is creeping up."

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!ms...o/rOC-Y63ENh8J

A scant three years later:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...22097241260450


gummer has never done even a single one-handed pullup, of course.
gummer has never been able to do 25 pullups. At age 53, 210 lb, gummer
couldn't do *one* two-handed pullup.

Do you think he ever considers how ludicrous his claims will sound? Or
is it more like the motorcycle record, where he knows so little about
his subject that he hasn't a clue how high a number to make up?

That's something I've said to him many times: "If you're going to lie -
and you are - at least tell *plausible* lies."

OR, you could say, Iffin yer gonna lie, tell the BIGGEST ****ing whopper you can think of!
For which, I might add, 5 1-armed pullups qualifies!!! LOL!!!

An alleged five one-armed pullups at age 53 and 210lb and just two years
short of triple coronary bypass surgery sure as hell *does* qualify.

On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:49:50 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:

snip

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 11:43:23 PM UTC-7, slow eddy, lifelong failure and worthless ad copy writer, failed:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 02:43:18 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:


Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 7:01:14 AM UTC-7, Anonymous posting pussy "Captain Obvious" failed:

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer. The difference is that your lies are motivated totally by malice. You are a hero in your own mind.

On 7/28/2015 11:43 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:49:50 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:

snip

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

An attempt at just that has been made. It went nowhere. If a zealous
prosecutor really wanted to go after him following a complaint, he
probably would only use the threats of violence as a bargaining chip for
something else. By themselves, they're not enough to interest either
the police or a prosecutor.


So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

They do. He's a good writer.

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 7:18:03 AM UTC-7, Jonathan Ball, using one of his many aliases, lied:

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, YOU are not publishing the Gummer Chronicles, are you? Would you ever?
Kidding/Oblivious do this not because of any inherent urge for justice, but simply bec they are malicious bullies. Plain and simple.
Of all the REAL bull**** out there to expose, and these assholes pick Gummer?
Why not Brainetics? Lumosity? The FDA/Big Pharma? GMO food? The ubiquitous frauds in health/fitness? Wall Street? Why not buy a poor kid some books or tutor him?

No, the Dickless fritter their time here on Gummer. That by itself spells impotence, on virtually every level. Can you imagine, Kidding would rather chronicle Gummer than **** his own wife??
'course, Kidding's wife may very well be grateful. She send Gummer a thank you card. And a check. lol

Gummers threats? Yeah, I can see that as irksome, but a Gummer Chronicle?? C'mon...

And Ed, if you think kidding's Don Rickles imitation is any example of litiricy, man, I gotta send you some BOOKS!! Kidding is a fraud, he has simply perfected verbal Party Tricks. His sole accomplishments in life appear to be his Chevy Volt and his Cliff Notes on Gummer.

Well, we'll see how smart kidding/oblivious are. They of course won't have **** to say on my Theorem on rec.running, cuz they won't understand a word of it, and the bottom line is they can't discuss ANYTHING of substance. Kidding is all about Don Rickles style handwaving.
BUT, they'll come back with both guns blazing, f'sure. Problem for them is, it's very hard to bull**** in mathematics.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:16:52 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:



Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:01:53 -0700, Captain Obvious
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 02:43:18 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:


Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

--
Ed Huntress

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

--
Ed Huntress

R69S?? For real? Earl's forks? Glorified nail for a key switch? LOL
I had a couple, plus the R50S, the 250cc R26, plus a Norton 750. Eventually went japanese. lol
And yeah, I do not miss bikes AT ALL.

Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+ are just bull****ing ignerani. Of course, a lot depends on the roads. It's suicide to drive fast in metro NY area roads, esp after the poor winter patch jobs.
Also, older bikes did not have handlebar/steering dampers/stabilizers, unless you did 3rd party add-ons. VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.
But of course kidding knows all this, right? You can tell from his pictures? LOL

On 7/29/2015 7:34 AM, Grokman Grokman wrote:

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, YOU are not publishing the Gummer Chronicles, are you? Would you ever?
Kidding/Oblivious do this not because of any inherent urge for justice, but simply bec they are malicious bullies. Plain and simple.

Plainly and simply, you're just wrong about this. gummer is the bully.
gummer has made threats that he clumsily tries to make vague - because
he's a pussy and doesn't have the guts to stand behind his threats - but
which nonetheless are intended to produce anxiety in his victims. It's
the intent that matters - it's the intent that means gummer is the
bully. gummer threatened me similarly not long ago. He said he
contacted "friends" in my area:

Just so you know...Ive called a few old friends up in your area and
they will be coming around to see about your orange tree..just to
make sure its sturdy enough to hold a mans weight.

If you hear motorcycles in the middle of the night...dont sweat
it..its just them.

I did in fact, really...actually..made a couple phone call this
morning. From one of the few payphones in my area. And the phone was
wiped down afterwards.

You made it to the List long ago..and its about time to answer for it.

yawn Just the usual gummer empty woofing shrug - I didn't, in fact,
"sweat" it. But gummer intended to create anxiety, and that intent
makes him at least a bully, and quite possibly a criminal. The law in
California, where gummer lives, is clear that electronic communications
(including Usenet posts) that are intended to cause fear of violence are
a felony crime. Whether the victim actually feels fear is irrelevant -
what matters is if a reasonable person would look at the communications
and conclude that they were intended to cause fear.

Captain Obvious is taking the bully down, quite humorously and quite
well. He writes wittily and cleverly. In a contest between you and him
over the propriety of his actions, he wins the battle for public
opinion, hands down.

On 7/29/2015 8:03 AM, Grokman Grokman wrote:


Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

--
Ed Huntress

R69S?? For real? Earl's forks? Glorified nail for a key switch? LOL
I had a couple, plus the R50S, the 250cc R26, plus a Norton 750. Eventually went japanese. lol
And yeah, I do not miss bikes AT ALL.

Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+

Where was the pooh-poohing?

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 11:03:58 AM UTC-4, Harold McKinney wrote:
On 7/29/2015 7:34 AM, Grokman Grokman wrote:

And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, YOU are not publishing the Gummer Chronicles, are you? Would you ever?
Kidding/Oblivious do this not because of any inherent urge for justice, but simply bec they are malicious bullies. Plain and simple.

Plainly and simply, you're just wrong about this. gummer is the bully.
gummer has made threats that he clumsily tries to make vague - because
he's a pussy and doesn't have the guts to stand behind his threats - but
which nonetheless are intended to produce anxiety in his victims. It's
the intent that matters - it's the intent that means gummer is the
bully. gummer threatened me similarly not long ago. He said he
contacted "friends" in my area:

Just so you know...Ive called a few old friends up in your area and
they will be coming around to see about your orange tree..just to
make sure its sturdy enough to hold a mans weight.

If you hear motorcycles in the middle of the night...dont sweat
it..its just them.

I did in fact, really...actually..made a couple phone call this
morning. From one of the few payphones in my area. And the phone was
wiped down afterwards.

You made it to the List long ago..and its about time to answer for it..

yawn Just the usual gummer empty woofing shrug - I didn't, in fact,
"sweat" it. But gummer intended to create anxiety, and that intent
makes him at least a bully, and quite possibly a criminal. The law in
California, where gummer lives, is clear that electronic communications
(including Usenet posts) that are intended to cause fear of violence are
a felony crime. Whether the victim actually feels fear is irrelevant -
what matters is if a reasonable person would look at the communications
and conclude that they were intended to cause fear.

Captain Obvious is taking the bully down, quite humorously and quite
well. He writes wittily and cleverly. In a contest between you and him
over the propriety of his actions, he wins the battle for public
opinion, hands down.

I can see how people can be ****ed at Gummer, he irked me years ago with some silliness. And I agree that some of Gummer's tacks lack wisdom, proper socialization. lol

But Dickless (kidding, Oblivious) has been doing this cliff note bull**** for AT LEAST 5 years. And exactly WHAT has it accomplished? Do you feel safer?

Don't be fooled by clever, witty, that most often is a disguise for fraud, incompetence. Kidding's sole motivation is WIN, and he will employ any tactic to do so, mostly 8th grade level ridicule, and not just with Gummer, but with anything. He is skilled at twisting history in a debate, at distorting the debate itself. He'll latch on to ANTHING he thinks will descredit you.
If you found Don Rickles funny, then yeah, you'll proly find Kidding/oblivious clever, witty. But with little depth, his tactics are just party tricks.

And you'll see: Kidding/Oblivious despise me, and they have ample opportunity to skewer me, with the fat burning theorem on rec.running. You think they will try?
We'll see, we'll see what tactics he employs now, with black and white meth.. Oops, math. Given his incompetence and preference for hand-waving, I expect he'll go for the plagiarizing angle. We'll see how that flies.

But I think he realizes that it's best he steers clear of anything concrete, to stick to his oratorical handwaving, so he can't be pinned down.

ED has depth, kidding is just a clever bitch. Sort of like a really pretty girl who never learned how to wash properly. What do you do with something like that? Well, just keep it at a distance.

As far as public opinion goes, are you sure about that? I've noticed that keyboard cowards like Kidding somehow manage to intimidate others, who aren't quite up to clever bitchy repartee. Gummer is a far easier mark, if you will.
Have you actually polled people on this? I think if you did, it would easily end in a tie, and maybe even more people would find kidding fundamentally distasteful.

Sorta like music: Is the music bad bec it's played too loud or badly (Gummer), or is the music bad because, well, it's just really ****ty music (Kidding)? Play really ****ty music in Lincoln Center, and you might not get a true consensus. It's still ****ty music. Kidding is still a fraud.

Gummer is a nut. Kidding/Oblivious is a vindictive cowardly bitch. If I had to choose one to be stuck on an island with, I'd pick Gummer hands down.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:51:03 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:



Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Uh, yeah, there is a big-mother bike in the garage, and it looks very
fast. The bike has a spectacular view of a beautiful lake among
mountains. I envy the bike. g

Regarding the fat model: What do you want me to do? I know just enough
about it to have an idea about what is not known. When I was writing
and editing articles on rimonabant, which I did for six months, I read
over 200 journal articles on intra-abdominal adiposity, metabolic
syndrome, inverse-agonists, endocannabinoid receptors, and Type I and
Type II diabetes. I know just enough to be dangerous. Don't let me get
near a scalpel. g

My reaction to what you've been saying is this: I am impressed with
what you've done. It appears that you're looking at some simple
relationships and deriving from them a heart-rate proxy for optimized
fat reduction -- or optimized something. My experience with metabolism
suggests that you may or may not have the right correlations, and that
you may or may not have enough factors in your model for it to be
meaningful.

I have no way to know. I'd need to read at least another dozen or two
dozen journal articles, and I gave that up for Lent five years ago.
Math still interests me but I find it tedious to remind myself about
things I haven't used for 20 years. It takes more time that I like to
invest in such things.

So I'm the wrong guy to comment on the substance of it. I'm still
impressed, however.

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:03:02 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:



Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

--
Ed Huntress

R69S?? For real? Earl's forks? Glorified nail for a key switch? LOL

Yeah, for real. It belonged to a college student friend from Michigan
State, who was on the one-year program with me at the Univ. of
Lausanne.

I had a couple, plus the R50S, the 250cc R26, plus a Norton 750. Eventually went japanese. lol
And yeah, I do not miss bikes AT ALL.

I loved the 250s. With two people on board, they wouldn't make it up
the hill at the end of my street at more than 30 mph, but they were
cool. If you had an old one with the funky fenders, they made you feel
like you were in "Hogan's Heroes."

Was your Norton an Atlas or a Commando? Commandos were very popular at
Michigan State in the '60s.


Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+ are just bull****ing ignerani. Of course, a lot depends on the roads. It's suicide to drive fast in metro NY area roads, esp after the poor winter patch jobs.

I have gone faster than 110 on other bikes -- for a few seconds.
Blasting up to speeds like that is one thing. Riding for a whole day
at 110 is something else entirely. Bern to Dusseldorf is six hours
plus on the bike.


Also, older bikes did not have handlebar/steering dampers/stabilizers, unless you did 3rd party add-ons. VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.
But of course kidding knows all this, right? You can tell from his pictures? LOL

I don't recognize his bike, but it's a newish one, it's beeg, and it
looks ridiculously fast.

--
Ed Huntress

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong.. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Uh, yeah, there is a big-mother bike in the garage, and it looks very
fast. The bike has a spectacular view of a beautiful lake among
mountains. I envy the bike. g

Regarding the fat model: What do you want me to do? I know just enough
about it to have an idea about what is not known. When I was writing
and editing articles on rimonabant, which I did for six months, I read
over 200 journal articles on intra-abdominal adiposity, metabolic
syndrome, inverse-agonists, endocannabinoid receptors, and Type I and
Type II diabetes. I know just enough to be dangerous. Don't let me get
near a scalpel. g

My reaction to what you've been saying is this: I am impressed with
what you've done. It appears that you're looking at some simple
relationships and deriving from them a heart-rate proxy for optimized
fat reduction -- or optimized something. My experience with metabolism
suggests that you may or may not have the right correlations, and that
you may or may not have enough factors in your model for it to be
meaningful.

I have no way to know. I'd need to read at least another dozen or two
dozen journal articles, and I gave that up for Lent five years ago.
Math still interests me but I find it tedious to remind myself about
things I haven't used for 20 years. It takes more time that I like to
invest in such things.

So I'm the wrong guy to comment on the substance of it. I'm still
impressed, however.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, you are one of the few who even took a look at it!
But....but....but..... Shouldn't Captain Oblivious -- the Caped Crusader and Defender of RCM -- be able to help? Isn't he, like, a fukn genius'n'****??

Shouldn't Super Oblivious be scrutinizing Le Fat Burning Theorem, looking to discredit me in any friggin way possible?? Shouldn't he be trying to impress RCM with his NEW and IMPROVED handjive, with bull**** mathematical handwaving that he kluged off Ig****'s bull**** math site???

Hmmmmm, Iknow, mebbe I can help the Good Cap'n discredit me. Here's some idears, off the top of my head.

1. He could look at it, and dismiss it as trivial.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

2. He could call it irrelevant.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

3. He could call it inaccurate.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

4. He could call it flat out wrong.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

5. He could claim it is a rehash of what's already been done.
Hooboy, he'd REALLY have to explain that one. Another ooops.

6. He could accuse me of plagiarism.
Oh, poor Captain Oblivious/kidding, dat mutha****a will be searching google for the next fukn year.

7. He could claim I stole this work from a puhfessuh or grad student or sumpn.
Hmmmm, that sounds promising, because unless someone complained, there would be no way to verify this, RIGHT UP KIDDING'S ASS, I MEAN, ALLEY.

8. He could claim my Daddy did my homework for me.
Hmmm, that's another promising tack.

9. He could claim that what I did is so fukn simple, any moron could do it.
Oooops.... bad idear, cuz then he would be pretty much obligated to reproduce it.

Oh, Oh, OH!!! I got it, I got it!!!

10. OK, here's the best one:
Captain America/Oblivion's tried and true strategy:

He could duck and dodge the Theorem, and just flail his arms, calling me a crackpot, a fraud, a failure, a mathematical ilitirit, the HoloBarre is ****, I'm ****, Banquer is ****, Gummer is ****, that he's too busy looking for a name for our PV/Banquer/Gummer TEAM to be bothered with silly math, he's too busy being successful (while stalking Gummer for over 5 years), etc etc etc etc.

Yeah, I think THAT is Kidding's best strategy. After all, he's well practiced at it, it's tried and true for him, and it WORKS -- at least on the morons/Castradis in RCM.

So his argerment would be: PV is fulla****, therefore his Theorem is fulla****. Therefore he's full****. Therefore.... well, you get the idear.

So Ed, what do you think, #10 for our Captain America/Oblivious?

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

--
Ed Huntress

R69S?? For real? Earl's forks? Glorified nail for a key switch? LOL

Yeah, for real. It belonged to a college student friend from Michigan
State, who was on the one-year program with me at the Univ. of
Lausanne.

I had a couple, plus the R50S, the 250cc R26, plus a Norton 750. Eventually went japanese. lol
And yeah, I do not miss bikes AT ALL.

I loved the 250s. With two people on board, they wouldn't make it up
the hill at the end of my street at more than 30 mph, but they were
cool. If you had an old one with the funky fenders, they made you feel
like you were in "Hogan's Heroes."

Was your Norton an Atlas or a Commando? Commandos were very popular at
Michigan State in the '60s.


Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast.. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+ are just bull****ing ignerani. Of course, a lot depends on the roads. It's suicide to drive fast in metro NY area roads, esp after the poor winter patch jobs.

I have gone faster than 110 on other bikes -- for a few seconds.
Blasting up to speeds like that is one thing. Riding for a whole day
at 110 is something else entirely. Bern to Dusseldorf is six hours
plus on the bike.


Also, older bikes did not have handlebar/steering dampers/stabilizers, unless you did 3rd party add-ons. VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.
But of course kidding knows all this, right? You can tell from his pictures? LOL

I don't recognize his bike, but it's a newish one, it's beeg, and it
looks ridiculously fast.

--
Ed Huntress

Yup, I had the Hogan Heroes R26!! LOL So cool. But you're right, slooooow!! LOL
There was also the R27, I think it had different carburation?

Norton Commando. iirc, only 4 speeds, but pulled like a locomotive. Hollow pipes, would shake plaster off a ceiling. I made the Harley guys look bad. They would actually come up, and ask me about my pipes.
Some mutha****a stole it.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:42:19 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:




Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Uh, yeah, there is a big-mother bike in the garage, and it looks very
fast. The bike has a spectacular view of a beautiful lake among
mountains. I envy the bike. g

Regarding the fat model: What do you want me to do? I know just enough
about it to have an idea about what is not known. When I was writing
and editing articles on rimonabant, which I did for six months, I read
over 200 journal articles on intra-abdominal adiposity, metabolic
syndrome, inverse-agonists, endocannabinoid receptors, and Type I and
Type II diabetes. I know just enough to be dangerous. Don't let me get
near a scalpel. g

My reaction to what you've been saying is this: I am impressed with
what you've done. It appears that you're looking at some simple
relationships and deriving from them a heart-rate proxy for optimized
fat reduction -- or optimized something. My experience with metabolism
suggests that you may or may not have the right correlations, and that
you may or may not have enough factors in your model for it to be
meaningful.

I have no way to know. I'd need to read at least another dozen or two
dozen journal articles, and I gave that up for Lent five years ago.
Math still interests me but I find it tedious to remind myself about
things I haven't used for 20 years. It takes more time that I like to
invest in such things.

So I'm the wrong guy to comment on the substance of it. I'm still
impressed, however.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, you are one of the few who even took a look at it!
But....but....but..... Shouldn't Captain Oblivious -- the Caped Crusader and Defender of RCM -- be able to help? Isn't he, like, a fukn genius'n'****??

Shouldn't Super Oblivious be scrutinizing Le Fat Burning Theorem, looking to discredit me in any friggin way possible?? Shouldn't he be trying to impress RCM with his NEW and IMPROVED handjive, with bull**** mathematical handwaving that he kluged off Ig****'s bull**** math site???

Hmmmmm, Iknow, mebbe I can help the Good Cap'n discredit me. Here's some idears, off the top of my head.

1. He could look at it, and dismiss it as trivial.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

2. He could call it irrelevant.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

3. He could call it inaccurate.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

4. He could call it flat out wrong.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

5. He could claim it is a rehash of what's already been done.
Hooboy, he'd REALLY have to explain that one. Another ooops.

6. He could accuse me of plagiarism.
Oh, poor Captain Oblivious/kidding, dat mutha****a will be searching google for the next fukn year.

7. He could claim I stole this work from a puhfessuh or grad student or sumpn.
Hmmmm, that sounds promising, because unless someone complained, there would be no way to verify this, RIGHT UP KIDDING'S ASS, I MEAN, ALLEY.

8. He could claim my Daddy did my homework for me.
Hmmm, that's another promising tack.

9. He could claim that what I did is so fukn simple, any moron could do it.
Oooops.... bad idear, cuz then he would be pretty much obligated to reproduce it.

Oh, Oh, OH!!! I got it, I got it!!!

10. OK, here's the best one:
Captain America/Oblivion's tried and true strategy:

He could duck and dodge the Theorem, and just flail his arms, calling me a crackpot, a fraud, a failure, a mathematical ilitirit, the HoloBarre is ****, I'm ****, Banquer is ****, Gummer is ****, that he's too busy looking for a name for our PV/Banquer/Gummer TEAM to be bothered with silly math, he's too busy being successful (while stalking Gummer for over 5 years), etc etc etc etc.

Yeah, I think THAT is Kidding's best strategy. After all, he's well practiced at it, it's tried and true for him, and it WORKS -- at least on the morons/Castradis in RCM.

So his argerment would be: PV is fulla****, therefore his Theorem is fulla****. Therefore he's full****. Therefore.... well, you get the idear.

So Ed, what do you think, #10 for our Captain America/Oblivious?

You missed #11, which was my answer. g

I think I said this several times a few years ago: I have no freaking
idea why you two are in such conflict. I don't see any emotional
problems from either of you; you're both smart; you both care about
the truth -- in fact, you're both pretty passionate about it. And I
don't see from either of you a complete immunity to making an
occassional mistake, which, within the context of what I said above,
should not lead to such conflict.

The fact that you're at each others' throats leaves me speechless. And
that's a hard thing to do. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill..

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

Ultimately most people here (less the Castradis) believe you as little as they believe Gummer.

Let's assume that's true. Who gives a ****? I don't care much about
anybody's opinion unless it's founded on reason. There isn't much of
that in this newsgroup, especially not from people like you. I do
respect Ed and Ed's opinions. He thinks straight and writes smoothly.
He's a guy I'd enjoy meeting in person. In fact, I recently sent him
an invite along with some photos of my current project, and a couple
video walkthroughs of a computer model. If you want to KNOW about my
speed claim for example, ask Ed if there were any bikes in those
photos that could back up my statements. You won't do anything like
that because you prefer **** you made up over reasonable evidence.
That's just one of the things that make you a crackpot.

MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Uh, yeah, there is a big-mother bike in the garage, and it looks very
fast. The bike has a spectacular view of a beautiful lake among
mountains. I envy the bike. g

Regarding the fat model: What do you want me to do? I know just enough
about it to have an idea about what is not known. When I was writing
and editing articles on rimonabant, which I did for six months, I read
over 200 journal articles on intra-abdominal adiposity, metabolic
syndrome, inverse-agonists, endocannabinoid receptors, and Type I and
Type II diabetes. I know just enough to be dangerous. Don't let me get
near a scalpel. g

My reaction to what you've been saying is this: I am impressed with
what you've done. It appears that you're looking at some simple
relationships and deriving from them a heart-rate proxy for optimized
fat reduction -- or optimized something. My experience with metabolism
suggests that you may or may not have the right correlations, and that
you may or may not have enough factors in your model for it to be
meaningful.

I have no way to know. I'd need to read at least another dozen or two
dozen journal articles, and I gave that up for Lent five years ago.
Math still interests me but I find it tedious to remind myself about
things I haven't used for 20 years. It takes more time that I like to
invest in such things.

So I'm the wrong guy to comment on the substance of it. I'm still
impressed, however.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, you are one of the few who even took a look at it!
But....but....but..... Shouldn't Captain Oblivious -- the Caped Crusader and Defender of RCM -- be able to help? Isn't he, like, a fukn genius'n'****??

Shouldn't Super Oblivious be scrutinizing Le Fat Burning Theorem, looking to discredit me in any friggin way possible?? Shouldn't he be trying to impress RCM with his NEW and IMPROVED handjive, with bull**** mathematical handwaving that he kluged off Ig****'s bull**** math site???

Hmmmmm, Iknow, mebbe I can help the Good Cap'n discredit me. Here's some idears, off the top of my head.

1. He could look at it, and dismiss it as trivial.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

2. He could call it irrelevant.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

3. He could call it inaccurate.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

4. He could call it flat out wrong.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

5. He could claim it is a rehash of what's already been done.
Hooboy, he'd REALLY have to explain that one. Another ooops.

6. He could accuse me of plagiarism.
Oh, poor Captain Oblivious/kidding, dat mutha****a will be searching google for the next fukn year.

7. He could claim I stole this work from a puhfessuh or grad student or sumpn.
Hmmmm, that sounds promising, because unless someone complained, there would be no way to verify this, RIGHT UP KIDDING'S ASS, I MEAN, ALLEY.

8. He could claim my Daddy did my homework for me.
Hmmm, that's another promising tack.

9. He could claim that what I did is so fukn simple, any moron could do it.
Oooops.... bad idear, cuz then he would be pretty much obligated to reproduce it.

Oh, Oh, OH!!! I got it, I got it!!!

10. OK, here's the best one:
Captain America/Oblivion's tried and true strategy:

He could duck and dodge the Theorem, and just flail his arms, calling me a crackpot, a fraud, a failure, a mathematical ilitirit, the HoloBarre is ****, I'm ****, Banquer is ****, Gummer is ****, that he's too busy looking for a name for our PV/Banquer/Gummer TEAM to be bothered with silly math, he's too busy being successful (while stalking Gummer for over 5 years), etc etc etc etc.

Yeah, I think THAT is Kidding's best strategy. After all, he's well practiced at it, it's tried and true for him, and it WORKS -- at least on the morons/Castradis in RCM.

So his argerment would be: PV is fulla****, therefore his Theorem is fulla****. Therefore he's full****. Therefore.... well, you get the idear.

So Ed, what do you think, #10 for our Captain America/Oblivious?

You missed #11, which was my answer. g

I think I said this several times a few years ago: I have no freaking
idea why you two are in such conflict. I don't see any emotional
problems from either of you; you're both smart; you both care about
the truth -- in fact, you're both pretty passionate about it. And I
don't see from either of you a complete immunity to making an
occassional mistake, which, within the context of what I said above,
should not lead to such conflict.

The fact that you're at each others' throats leaves me speechless. And
that's a hard thing to do. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, I don't know, I just don't know, all my life I've had strife.
I've always gotten **** for being really good looking, and old fags are, to this day, STILL hitting on me, and the young fags want me to be their daddy. And then they both wind up hating me.
The Manhattan Fems hate me.
I get **** in the locker room for having a really big dick, esp. from the black guys.

Other people hate me cuz I have a Haas GR510, and I won't do work for them.
Haas hates me cuz I like my Fadal 3016L much better than the Haas. It's just that, work envelope-wise, the Haas has a fukn 61x121" table, equiv to about 16 Fadals!!!

And NOW people hate me cuz I know calculus, and they don't.
Oh, OH, and now assholes REALLY hate me cuz I now have my own mathematical theorem! Actually, I got 3, but this Fat Burning one is the nicest.

Oh, black gerls really dig me, but now the black guys hate me even more for that.

And now Gummer is going to give me a blow job, so now I have to worry about THAT.
What a life.
No peace for Moi, Ed, just no peace.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:45:39 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:01:53 -0700, Captain Obvious
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 02:43:18 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:


Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

Nice summary, Ed. But PV knows every word of it already. He doesn't
care, he has his own bashing to do and it will be entertaining to see
how many more ludicrous 125=256 excuses he can come up along the way.

BTW, I have a very fast bike, a lot of riding experience, and live
where I can occasionally open the throttle. I've been over 125 a
couple times recently while passing. It in no way made me feel
entitled to say I'd gone 256, because that would be stupid and nobody
would believe it.

I rode a new, Euro-delivered BMW R69S from Bern to Dusseldorf mostly
flat-out (around 110) in 1968, and my teeth ached at the end of the
ride, from clamping my jaws. g

You can have it, thank you very much.

Try anything with an electrically adjustable windshield, which tends
to come on bikes that are comfortable at high speeds. I rode at 100+
for a good distance the other day. Quite comfortable although it
obviously still requires some extra focus. In my case. it was a safe
interval behind what looked like an entire Corvette club that was
blocking for me.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:34:29 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:

Problem for them is, it's very hard to bull**** in mathematics.

But not impossible considering you were happy to muff counting to
"few."

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:42:19 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:



1. He could look at it, and dismiss it as trivial.
Oh, but then he'd have to explain why... ooops.

2. He could call it irrelevant.

Blah blah blah.

I take it this is about losing weight? I don't need to lose any. But
when I need advice on anything I look to people I trust based on their
reasoning skills. Anything you write I'd have to check with an expert.
I could save time by doing that first. Yeah I know you'll say you're
an expert. Same as Banquer and Wieber.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:03:02 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:

VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.

Rubbish. Lots of fast, safe bikes have neither. Mine is rev limited to
a top speed of 160 IIRC. You're doing the same thing Wieber does,
taking old limited knowledge and using it to make **** up. I think
Wieber had an old 600cc boxer. Those were something like 45hp. I'm
beginning to wonder if your experience is about the same.

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:19:17 PM UTC-7, Anonymous posting pussy "Captain Obvious" lied:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:51:03 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:


MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed, MMMMMMmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Yuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm
Oh, Ed,
Back up my statements, SLuuuuuuuurp,
Oh, Ed, give it to me Ed, give me your reasonable evidence
GUUULP BUUUUURP AHHHHHHHHH buuuuuuurp
Oh, Ed, what a wad, that was delicious....
NOW will you watch my Comptery Model??

Classic PV drivel. It is amazing how good you are at proving my point,
and how willing you are to do it.

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:28:18 PM UTC-7, Anonymous posting pussy "Captain Obvious" lied:

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:09:54 -0700, Harold McKinney
wrote:

On 7/29/2015 8:03 AM, Grokman Grokman wrote:



Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+

Where was the pooh-poohing?

There was none. He made it up.

On 7/29/2015 1:31 PM, Captain Obvious wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:09:54 -0700, Harold McKinney
wrote:

On 7/29/2015 8:03 AM, Grokman Grokman wrote:



Tough to ride fast without a fairing. Anything over 100 mph is very fast. Assholes (like kidding) who pooh-pooh 125+

Where was the pooh-poohing?

There was none. He made it up.

That's what I already concluded.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:49:00 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:


Norton Commando. iirc

You don't recall ? WTF?

I damned sure remember that my 750 was an Atlas.

only 4 speeds, but pulled like a locomotive.

LOL You mean one of those 60hp locomotives I guess.

I made the Harley guys look bad.

That's like saying you can run faster than your granny.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 07:34:29 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:


And if anyone should be """outraged""" by 5 1-handed pullups, it should be Moi, since I'm in the fukn bidniss. If it rolls off my back, why should it stick in YOUR craw the way it does?
And so what about a 264 mph motorcycle? If all these tales bother you so much, just make sure you don't lend Gummer any money, and just STFU.
No, but the dickless LoserKidding has to chronicle all this, on a regular basis. What a fukn wad. Pity his fuknWife and kids.

Children! Children! I go out for one night, and look at what you've
done to the house! g

PV, I don't know if you missed the origins of all of these conflicts,
or if you just decided to ignore them. It isn't because Gunner tells
"tall tales." It's because he's insulted, slandered, tried to
humiliate, and threatened every one of them -- myself included. A few
people (myself included) just got fed up with his vile and dishonest
style of argument, and his whole approach to sharp disagreements is
now the subject. As an inveterate bull****ter, Gunner takes the heat
for it. Like Jonny Bonkers, he's just reaping what he's sown.

It really starts with attitudes towards civility. You either have it
by age 10, or you don't. It's hard to see it now -- it's degenerated
so much that the entire battle is kind of dirty -- but there's no
doubt how it started and where it came from. He's never let up: anyone
he disagrees with is a "libtard," a "Marxist," "gay," or worse.

He lacks the ability to disagree in a civil way and, as a result, he
argues like white trash. His threats to have people killed actually
are criminal. Probably because of the company he keeps, or the
environment he's in, he's deluded himself that he's managed to skirt
the law with his many threats, which are hardly veiled. He's wrong. It
isn't "banter" when you get specific about weapons to be used and
people on a "list" to be killed. If someone really got upset about it,
it wouldn't be hard to have Gunner investigated for terroristic
threats.

So recognize where the divide is. People who are basically civil can
sometimes get really heated and insulting. White trash tell you you're
on a "list" of people his "friends" are going to shoot and kill.

And you have to admit, Whoyakidding's Cliffs Notes have a genuine
literary quality. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, YOU are not publishing the Gummer Chronicles, are you?

"Publishing"? Who would buy it? g

Would you ever?

I can't imagine it.

Kidding/Oblivious do this not because of any inherent urge for justice, but simply bec they are malicious bullies. Plain and simple.
Of all the REAL bull**** out there to expose, and these assholes pick Gummer?
Why not Brainetics? Lumosity? The FDA/Big Pharma? GMO food? The ubiquitous frauds in health/fitness? Wall Street? Why not buy a poor kid some books or tutor him?

No, the Dickless fritter their time here on Gummer. That by itself spells impotence, on virtually every level. Can you imagine, Kidding would rather chronicle Gummer than **** his own wife??
'course, Kidding's wife may very well be grateful. She send Gummer a thank you card. And a check. lol

Gummers threats? Yeah, I can see that as irksome, but a Gummer Chronicle?? C'mon...

And Ed, if you think kidding's Don Rickles imitation is any example of litiricy, man, I gotta send you some BOOKS!! Kidding is a fraud, he has simply perfected verbal Party Tricks. His sole accomplishments in life appear to be his Chevy Volt and his Cliff Notes on Gummer.

Well, we'll see how smart kidding/oblivious are. They of course won't have **** to say on my Theorem on rec.running, cuz they won't understand a word of it, and the bottom line is they can't discuss ANYTHING of substance. Kidding is all about Don Rickles style handwaving.
BUT, they'll come back with both guns blazing, f'sure. Problem for them is, it's very hard to bull**** in mathematics.

sigh

--
Ed Huntress

VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.

Rubbish. Lots of fast, safe bikes have neither. Mine is rev limited to
a top speed of 160 IIRC. You're doing the same thing Wieber does,
taking old limited knowledge and using it to make **** up. I think
Wieber had an old 600cc boxer. Those were something like 45hp. I'm
beginning to wonder if your experience is about the same.

Maybe these guys lack experience too?

Oscillation is a desireable action... if you're on a swing at the park. It's a nasty action at 75mph on a motorcycle, and shag nasty at 160. We spoke with Jason DiSalvo's 2009 AMA Crew Chief, Michael Tjon Sien Kie, about "head shake" and the steering stabilizers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP-UfUrymY4
Funny, they mentioned the same 75 mph I did.

There is a one word explanation: resonance. Look it up in wiki.
Different road conditions will set up different resonances in different bikes.

What's funny, oblivious, is how authoritative you are, ALL the time.
And did you ever bother to think, Gee, just why do people use these? They're even used on bicycles.

But, Oblivious, feel free not to use one, and please please go as fast as you can.

Norton Commando. iirc

You don't recall ? WTF?

I damned sure remember that my 750 was an Atlas.

See, you edited the post.
I said, Norton Commando. Period.
Then, the iirc, it was a 4-speed.

You're good Kidding, really good. Totally dishonest, and a raving bitch, but very good at what you do.



only 4 speeds, but pulled like a locomotive.

LOL You mean one of those 60hp locomotives I guess.

I towed a car with it. So yeah.


I made the Harley guys look bad.

That's like saying you can run faster than your granny.

No, I was referring to the pipes, which I think was pretty clear. Once again, you chose to distort the post.

Keep going, Cap'n, pretty soon even Ed will see thru your pathological bull****.
Harold won't, but then somehow you managed to slip your dick in his mouth.

On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 4:35:49 PM UTC-7, Grokman Grokman wrote:


Norton Commando. iirc

You don't recall ? WTF?

I damned sure remember that my 750 was an Atlas.

See, you edited the post.
I said, Norton Commando. Period.
Then, the iirc, it was a 4-speed.

You're good Kidding, really good. Totally dishonest, and a raving bitch, but very good at what you do.



only 4 speeds, but pulled like a locomotive.

LOL You mean one of those 60hp locomotives I guess.

I towed a car with it. So yeah.


I made the Harley guys look bad.

That's like saying you can run faster than your granny.

No, I was referring to the pipes, which I think was pretty clear. Once again, you chose to distort the post.

Keep going, Cap'n, pretty soon even Ed will see thru your pathological bull****.
Harold won't, but then somehow you managed to slip your dick in his mouth.


slow eddy got his nickname for damn good reason. I've watched others like failed software reseller John Carroll use slow eddy like a tool for years.

There is a reason slow eddy has spent the majority of his life being a Pay For Play ad copy writer.

There is a reason my LinkedIn CADCAM group continues to grow like crazy. Knowledgeable machinists and CADCAM programmers have had more than enough of corrupt, lying, worthless **** bags like slow eddy that fill the CADCAM industry.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:28:53 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:


VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.

Rubbish. Lots of fast, safe bikes have neither. Mine is rev limited to
a top speed of 160 IIRC. You're doing the same thing Wieber does,
taking old limited knowledge and using it to make **** up. I think
Wieber had an old 600cc boxer. Those were something like 45hp. I'm
beginning to wonder if your experience is about the same.

Maybe these guys lack experience too?

blah blah blah

I've been on every kind of road on every kind of bike. You telling me
every bike needs a steering damper and a fairing on some roads is
stupid. Some bikes have damper. Some bikes need them. Fairings are
primarily for comfort and streamling. They won't do a damned thing to
help on pavement grooves or lane scallops. Bad geometry, loose
steering heads and some tires can be miserable on the wrong roads and
you might alleviate the symptoms with a damper. The thing is, if you
need a damper to cure a bad problem it better be tuned properly
otherwise it might only be a cure in your mind, and you'll be forced
into reality with an unrecoverable tank slapper. Same with some
aircraft castering nosewheels. Friction damper might be just the thing
until it gets some a little oil on it then whammo, you're skating on
your prop's rapidly decreasing diameter. Now get typing and tell me
how little I know.

You remind me of a customer in a movie, forgot the name. Stereo
salesman tells earnest buyer he doesn't need expensive amp. Then he
tells asshole buyer he really needs the same expensive amp. If you get
a bike, you need a damper and a fairing and a stereo. You wouldn't
want to risk your life would you? Of course not.

VERY dangerous to go over even 75 mph on, say, the Deegan without these stabilizers/fairings.

Rubbish. Lots of fast, safe bikes have neither. Mine is rev limited to
a top speed of 160 IIRC. You're doing the same thing Wieber does,
taking old limited knowledge and using it to make **** up. I think
Wieber had an old 600cc boxer. Those were something like 45hp. I'm
beginning to wonder if your experience is about the same.

Maybe these guys lack experience too?

blah blah blah

I've been on every kind of road on every kind of bike. You telling me
every bike needs a steering damper and a fairing on some roads is
stupid. Some bikes have damper. Some bikes need them. Fairings are
primarily for comfort and streamling. They won't do a damned thing to
help on pavement grooves or lane scallops. Bad geometry, loose
steering heads and some tires can be miserable on the wrong roads and
you might alleviate the symptoms with a damper. The thing is, if you
need a damper to cure a bad problem it better be tuned properly
otherwise it might only be a cure in your mind, and you'll be forced
into reality with an unrecoverable tank slapper. Same with some
aircraft castering nosewheels. Friction damper might be just the thing
until it gets some a little oil on it then whammo, you're skating on
your prop's rapidly decreasing diameter. Now get typing and tell me
how little I know.

You half concede and yet you are still almost totally fulla****.
But yeah, KIdding, Cap'n, you are GOOD!! What a consummate bull****ter!!

Apparently you know nothing about resonance. and WTF is talking about oil and friction?
Jesus, kidding, you haven't changed one bit, you NEVER stop, even when you have been shown to be dead wrong.

Forget about fairings. You may NEVER need a damper, if you ride consistently on the right road. Dampers are for the other 99.999% of possiblities.

Keep on keeping on. Oh, did I mention the Theorem you can discredit me with? RCM, july 22. Give it a shot, you're throwing Hail Mary's as it is.



You remind me of a customer in a movie, forgot the name. Stereo
salesman tells earnest buyer he doesn't need expensive amp. Then he
tells asshole buyer he really needs the same expensive amp. If you get
a bike, you need a damper and a fairing and a stereo. You wouldn't
want to risk your life would you? Of course not.

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:35:46 -0700 (PDT), Grokman Grokman
wrote:



Norton Commando. iirc

You don't recall ? WTF?

I damned sure remember that my 750 was an Atlas.

See, you edited the post.
I said, Norton Commando. Period.
Then, the iirc, it was a 4-speed.

Right you are! Same as a stopped clock though. If you weren't such an
asshole I'd apologize.

You're good Kidding, really good. Totally dishonest, and a raving bitch, but very good at what you do.



only 4 speeds, but pulled like a locomotive.

LOL You mean one of those 60hp locomotives I guess.

I towed a car with it. So yeah.

People pull cars with their feet and ropes and garden tractors and
comealongs. Nobody calls them locomotives. According to your logic, if
a baby tows his blanket he's a locomotive. Yeah I know you really felt
like you had a bull by the horns riding that Commando. We all did,
same as when we were younger and felt the power of the bicycle cards
on our spokes. But it's past time to pretend that the low hp wallowing
crap from those days were mighty performers.

I made the Harley guys look bad.

That's like saying you can run faster than your granny.

No, I was referring to the pipes, which I think was pretty clear.

Right again! I keep forgetting that some people equate noise with
performance, or prefer noise over performance, or use noise to mask a
lack of performance.

Keep going, Cap'n, pretty soon even Ed will see thru your pathological bull****.
Harold won't, but then somehow you managed to slip your dick in his mouth.

Ohmygawd, people will choose to disbelieve what I know to be true? Now
you have me worried! How is this going to affect my life? Will it be
like some time travel paradox where my bike disappears or something?
Or will it just be you nattering juvenile scatological remarks?