Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
The Ghost
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bob Cain Is In Convulsions: A Doppler Piston Just Got Shoved Up His Tube

For those who are interested, an exact mathematical analysis of the
Doppler distortion that is produced by a vibrating piston in a tube
can be found at:

http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/Physi...on/dopdist.htm

Direct experimental measurements that confirm the predictions of the
mathematical analysis will follow shortly.
  #2   Report Post  
Karl Uppiano
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...
For those who are interested, an exact mathematical analysis of the
Doppler distortion that is produced by a vibrating piston in a tube
can be found at:

http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/Physi...on/dopdist.htm

Direct experimental measurements that confirm the predictions of the
mathematical analysis will follow shortly.


Good post. Unfortunate title. It looks like perhaps we finally have a
predictive mathematical model. Let the experiments begin! We might now have
the tools we need to settle this issue once and for all.


  #3   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Karl Uppiano wrote:

Good post. Unfortunate title.


Yeah, the subject of this thread is unfortunate since Art's
recent work on this is at my specific request and using the
traditional method of proof I requested because he
immediately saw the need.

The subject is, however, characteristic.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #4   Report Post  
Karl Uppiano
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah, the subject of this thread is unfortunate since Art's recent work on
this is at my specific request and using the traditional method of proof I
requested because he immediately saw the need.


I just printed it out. I haven't had time to understand it fully yet, but it
looks like exactly what we need.


  #5   Report Post  
The Ghost
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Cain wrote in message ...

Yeah, the subject of this thread is unfortunate since Art's
recent work on this is at my specific request and using the
traditional method of proof I requested because he
immediately saw the need.


What is really unfortunate is that you are a liar. The truth of the
matter is that Art completed the analysis only after I informed him
that you were knowingly misrepresenting his position on the issue in
newsgroups, and that I planned on making direct measurements of
Doppler distortion produced by a pistion in a tube.

Also, since you failed to mention it, everyone needs to know that the
mathematical analysis that Art has published on his website predicts
the existence of Doppler distortion produced by a pistion in a tube,
and that this prediction contradicts the unsubstantiated
beliefs/claims that you have been contaminating these newsgroups with
for the last several weeks.

The debate is over and it's time for you to admit that you that you
were wrong on every aspect of the issue. The only thing that remains
is a direct experimental confirmation of Art's theoretical
predicitons. I can assure you that such a confirmation will be
forthcoming shortly.


  #6   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



The Ghost wrote:

Bob Cain wrote in message ...


Yeah, the subject of this thread is unfortunate since Art's
recent work on this is at my specific request and using the
traditional method of proof I requested because he
immediately saw the need.



What is really unfortunate is that you are a liar. The truth of the
matter is that Art completed the analysis only after I informed him
that you were knowingly misrepresenting his position on the issue in
newsgroups, and that I planned on making direct measurements of
Doppler distortion produced by a pistion in a tube.


You are the liar or perhaps you are just ignorant of the
fact that his most recent work, which he made public
yesterday, follows (to a point) the usual guidelines of
proof that I respectfully requested of him the day before.

You may have informed him that I knowingly misrepresented
him (which is merely your paranoid presumption) but he does
not interpret what actually happened that way at all after
discussion with me. I am not going to allow his good name
to become embroiled further in your psycho dissembling
toward me but I just couldn't let that monstrous charge go
unchallenged. You are obviously and pitiably whacked.

That's it. I will not discuss anything that transpired
between me and him or between you and him one bit further.
I will address his proof at the point that I've said I will
but you are out of the picture as far as I am concerned
other than as a minor and inconsequential, loud mouthed
irritant.


Also, since you failed to mention it, everyone needs to know that the
mathematical analysis that Art has published on his website predicts
the existence of Doppler distortion produced by a pistion in a tube,


With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to
follow as we narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or
not.


The debate is over and it's time for you to admit that you that you
were wrong on every aspect of the issue. The only thing that remains
is a direct experimental confirmation of Art's theoretical
predicitons. I can assure you that such a confirmation will be
forthcoming shortly.


Have at it and be sure and present an experiment provably
free of extraneous signal and repeatable by a disinterested
experimenter. I keep wanting to say, "you know the routine"
but I really don't think you do. An experiment can be
crafted to prove anything. Near morons can do it and have.
A good experimental test of a theory is one that is
carefully designed to disprove it and fails. I know way
better than to expect good science from you.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #7   Report Post  
Randy Yates
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Cain writes:
[...]
With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to follow as we
narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or not.


If you haven't resolved it, then how can you state with
such certainty that he is "incorrect"?
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
  #8   Report Post  
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...

Also, since you failed to mention it, everyone needs to know that the
mathematical analysis that Art has published on his website predicts
the existence of Doppler distortion produced by a pistion in a tube,
and that this prediction contradicts the unsubstantiated
beliefs/claims that you have been contaminating these newsgroups with
for the last several weeks.


And where exactly did Bob say his beliefs/claims were substantiated? As I
recall he said that he did not have direct proof. He asked for people to
prove him wrong or at least prove their myriad of claims true. None of you
were able. He independently sought out someone he felt knew more about the
subject. That person has now produced what nobody else here has bothered to
produce, including you.

I'm not sure how this makes Bob look bad.


The debate is over and it's time for you to admit that you that you
were wrong on every aspect of the issue. The only thing that remains
is a direct experimental confirmation of Art's theoretical
predicitons. I can assure you that such a confirmation will be
forthcoming shortly.


I'm not sure how the debate is over simply because on person posted what he
believes to be the correct analysis. Even you admit direct experimental
confirmation is still forthcoming. I think those with the knowledge can and
should analyze what Art has posted and attempt to poke holes in it.

I, for one, think Bob will admit he's wrong if in fact he is proven so. From
where I sit I haven't seen him proven wrong. I see Bob as FINALLY getting
someone to produce what he has been requesting for weeks.

I've also seen some very insecure people such as yourself get their panties
in a bunch because someone dared question the status quo.


  #9   Report Post  
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Randy Yates" wrote in message
...
Bob Cain writes:
[...]
With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to follow as we
narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or not.


If you haven't resolved it, then how can you state with
such certainty that he is "incorrect"?


I believe he states it with the less certainty than Ghost used when he
declared the debate to be over. Look again at what Bob wrote. He says that
there is more to follow on the disagreement until it is resolved or not.
Sounds like the words of someone who is willing to listen and who is willing
to entertain that he may be wrong. Sounds like Art is cut from the same
cloth.

It escapes me why so many people are hopped up on the "Let's Nail Bob" drug.
I've been reading these threads since the start. He expanded the thread to
other newsgroups since the folks in alt.music.home-studio were unable to
help him. He's admitted to be wrong about certain aspects already. He has
asked for proof and sought insight from outside the newsgroups. Why are
people getting so personal with him?


  #10   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Randy Yates wrote:

Bob Cain writes:

[...]
With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to follow as we
narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or not.



If you haven't resolved it, then how can you state with
such certainty that he is "incorrect"?


Because he is. Time will tell whether I am right or wrong
about that but in any event I've given him my first
technical and theoretical objections and reasons as to why,
and they are under consderation. I could post them but I
don't want to make the discussion a public one for what I
hope have become obvious reasons. I'm tired of swatting
annoying flys and I do _not_ mean you, Randy.



Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein


  #11   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Jim Carr wrote:

And where exactly did Bob say his beliefs/claims were substantiated? As I
recall he said that he did not have direct proof. He asked for people to
prove him wrong or at least prove their myriad of claims true. None of you
were able. He independently sought out someone he felt knew more about the
subject. That person has now produced what nobody else here has bothered to
produce, including you.

I'm not sure how this makes Bob look bad.


To be fair, it doesn't look good at all that I can't yet
prove my conjecture and have to resort to requests for
refutation of it or proof of competing ones but that's just
the way it is at the moment. I'm not sure it makes me look
bad, and I'm obviously not too concerned about it, but I'm
well aware that I'd look a whole lot better if I could find
an approach that leads to proof of mine.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #12   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
"Randy Yates" wrote in message
...
Bob Cain writes:
[...]
With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to follow as we
narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or not.


If you haven't resolved it, then how can you state with
such certainty that he is "incorrect"?


I believe he states it with the less certainty than Ghost used when he
declared the debate to be over. Look again at what Bob wrote. He says that
there is more to follow on the disagreement until it is resolved or not.
Sounds like the words of someone who is willing to listen and who is

willing
to entertain that he may be wrong. Sounds like Art is cut from the same
cloth.

It escapes me why so many people are hopped up on the "Let's Nail Bob"

drug.
I've been reading these threads since the start. He expanded the thread to
other newsgroups since the folks in alt.music.home-studio were unable to
help him. He's admitted to be wrong about certain aspects already. He has
asked for proof and sought insight from outside the newsgroups. Why are
people getting so personal with him?

Having been on the "Let's nail Bob" drug a while back, I must say that
after I shut my big mouth and started listening, I realized that he was
making sense, and that he was indeed worth listening to. Bob and I have been
corresponding on this subject off-groups, and we don't agree on every
specific detail, but I think he may very well be onto something important. I
personally think it may only loosely be Doppler related, but he is calling
it Doppler mixing (not Doppler distortion or Doppler shift) mainly for want
of a more discriptive term, I think. What he's looking at is more complex
than simple Doppler shift, and I have a inkling of it, but not nearly enough
to expound on here. It will probably take some time for him to formulate his
theory, but I think the end result will be worth waiting for. Even if he
winds up being wrong, I think the end result will still be quite educational
for those who follow this discussion.


  #13   Report Post  
S O'Neill
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Cain wrote:



Jim Carr wrote:

And where exactly did Bob say his beliefs/claims were substantiated? As I
recall he said that he did not have direct proof. He asked for people to
prove him wrong or at least prove their myriad of claims true. None of
you
were able. He independently sought out someone he felt knew more about
the
subject. That person has now produced what nobody else here has
bothered to
produce, including you.

I'm not sure how this makes Bob look bad.



To be fair, it doesn't look good at all that I can't yet prove my
conjecture and have to resort to requests for refutation of it or proof
of competing ones but that's just the way it is at the moment. I'm not
sure it makes me look bad, and I'm obviously not too concerned about it,
but I'm well aware that I'd look a whole lot better if I could find an
approach that leads to proof of mine.



I for one am glad you have had the courage to pursue this question to
its resolution. Thank you for sticking with it. I have learned a lot
about the mechanics of the interface and hope to learn more. I suspect
that many others are in the same boat.


  #14   Report Post  
Phil Allison
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"S O'Neill"


I for one am glad you have had the courage to pursue this question to
its resolution. Thank you for sticking with it. I have learned a lot
about the mechanics of the interface and hope to learn more. I suspect
that many others are in the same boat.



** The SS Titanic.



.......... Phil


  #15   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



S O'Neill wrote:

I for one am glad you have had the courage to pursue this question to
its resolution. Thank you for sticking with it. I have learned a lot
about the mechanics of the interface and hope to learn more. I suspect
that many others are in the same boat.


Thanks, Steve. I greatly appreciate the sentiment. I'd
send this privately but... :-)


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein


  #16   Report Post  
Randy Yates
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Cain writes:

Randy Yates wrote:

Bob Cain writes:

[...]
With all the respect due Art, it is incorrect. More to follow as we
narrow in on the disagreement and resolve it or not.

If you haven't resolved it, then how can you state with
such certainty that he is "incorrect"?


Because he is. Time will tell whether I am right or wrong about that
but in any event I've given him my first technical and theoretical
objections and reasons as to why, and they are under consderation.


So you're saying that you are certain he's wrong and that what has to be
"resolved" is the bridging of understanding between you and he?

I could post them but I don't want to make the discussion a public
one for what I hope have become obvious reasons.


Agreed. It's none of our business unless you choose to reveal it.

I'm tired of swatting annoying flys and I do _not_ mean you, Randy.


I'm a moth?
--
% Randy Yates % "Bird, on the wing,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % goes floating by
%%% 919-577-9882 % but there's a teardrop in his eye..."
%%%% % 'One Summer Dream', *Face The Music*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
  #17   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Randy Yates wrote:



So you're saying that you are certain he's wrong and that what has to be
"resolved" is the bridging of understanding between you and he?


Yes. Of course that doesn't mean we will end up in
agreement about that by any means. Of course I hope to
persuade him of what I see as a reasoning flaw and there is
always the possiblity that he will persuade me that it
isn't. That would be a bridging of understanding but it is
altogether possible too that neither of us can be persuaded.



I could post them but I don't want to make the discussion a public
one for what I hope have become obvious reasons.



Agreed. It's none of our business unless you choose to reveal it.


It's not that I consider it none of anybody's business and
perhaps when all is said and done a log of the conversation
could be made available to the interested but I obviously
won't presume to speak for Art about that. I just sorta
consider what happens until we finally agree or agree to
disagree to be intermediate results. At that point, and
with his editorial approval if he wishes to give it, I'll
report where we ended up.

I'm tired of swatting annoying flys and I do _not_ mean you, Randy.



I'm a moth?


Nah, you're not that soft and fuzzy. :-)


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #18   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...

"S O'Neill"
** The SS Titanic.

And of course, you're the captain, Phil. You're definitely going down
with your ship as far as these news groups are concerned. If you're trying
to be a wit, you're halfway there!*ROFL*


  #19   Report Post  
Angelo Campanella
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jim Carr wrote:
"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...

snip

EVERYBODY:

STOP CROSS-POSTING OUT OF (AND INTO) THIS ACOUSTICS NEWS GROUP.

AND WE NEED NO NAME-CALLING.

Angelo Campanella


  #20   Report Post  
The Ghost
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jim Carr" wrote in message news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
Why are
people getting so personal with him?


1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks
Need I continue?


  #21   Report Post  
The Ghost
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jim Carr" wrote in message news:a_vYc.10497$bT1.5880@fed1read07...

I, for one, think Bob will admit he's wrong if in fact he is proven so. From
where I sit I haven't seen him proven wrong. I see Bob as FINALLY getting
someone to produce what he has been requesting for weeks.


No, Bob Cain is finally getting someone to produce the obvious.
Furthermore, Bob Cain's overly-inflated ego will never allow him to
admit that he is wrong.


I've also seen some very insecure people such as yourself get their panties
in a bunch because someone dared question the status quo.


Obviously, you dimwit moron, you don't know me and you don't know the
meaning of insecure. The fact of the matter is that I have forgotten
more than you and your mindless compadres in these audio groups will,
combined, ever know. So, stick that up your ****ing insecure ass and
smoke it.
  #22   Report Post  
Phil Allison
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"The Ghost"
"Jim Carr"

Why are
people getting so personal with him?


1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks

Need I continue?




** No - but why stop when you are on a roll ?

Don't forget to mention that Bob Cain is:


4) A pathological narcissist

5) A fallacious reasoner

6) A boaster and a troll

7) A grandiose liar

8) A public masturbator





.......... Phil



  #23   Report Post  
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message

news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
Why are
people getting so personal with him?


1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks
Need I continue?


Is somebody grumpy because Disney Channel has been running repeats all
summer?


  #24   Report Post  
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...

Obviously, you dimwit moron, you don't know me and you don't know the
meaning of insecure.


Are you implying that if I knew you I would know the meaning of insecure?

The fact of the matter is that I have forgotten
more than you and your mindless compadres in these audio groups will,
combined, ever know.


I see. You're insecure because your memory is failing. I'm sorry to hear
that. But that's no reason to get testy.

So, stick that up your ****ing insecure ass and
smoke it.


GASP!! That hurts. That *really* hurts.


  #25   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Jim Carr wrote:

"The Ghost" wrote

So, stick that up your ****ing insecure ass and
smoke it.



GASP!! That hurts. That *really* hurts.


Jim, you've shown that you are _really_ good at getting the
skinny on people. Could you be persuaded to turn those
talents on this creep?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein


  #26   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Phil Allison wrote:



** No - but why stop when you are on a roll ?

Don't forget to mention that Bob Cain is:


4) A pathological narcissist

5) A fallacious reasoner

6) A boaster and a troll

7) A grandiose liar

8) A public masturbator


Ah, I know I've arrived when I get personal insults from
Phil Allison. I can think of little that would so assure me
that I'm on the right track. Gary Sookolich in hiding (The
Ghost) goes a long way toward that but he is merely crazy
and sees himself in everybody, one of the more unfortunate
aspects of paranoia but somewhat understandable when you've
become a ghost. Where else, after all, is there to look for
yourself? You, Phil, are a man without peer. Your choice
of past targets puts me in excellent company indeed.


Thanks,

Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #27   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Bob Cain wrote:

Jim, you've shown that you are _really_ good at getting the skinny on
people. Could you be persuaded to turn those talents on this creep?


Oh, before someone offed him his name was Gary Sokolich.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #29   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 19:39:10 -0700, "Jim Carr"
wrote:

"The Ghost" wrote in message
. com...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message

news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
Why are
people getting so personal with him?


1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks
Need I continue?


Is somebody grumpy because Disney Channel has been running repeats all
summer?


Also Dopey and Sleepy? :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  #30   Report Post  
Phil Allison
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bob Cain"

Phil Allison wrote:


** No - but why stop when you are on a roll ?

Don't forget to mention that Bob Cain is:


4) A pathological narcissist

5) A fallacious reasoner

6) A boaster and a troll

7) A grandiose liar

8) A public masturbator


Ah, I know I've arrived when I get personal insults from
Phil Allison.



** You have arrived in hell - along with the other vermin and sub human
scum that infest Usenet.


You, Phil, are a man without peer. Your choice
of past targets puts me in excellent company indeed.



** Sure thing - right along with parrots like Rivers, congenital liars
like Dorsey and innumerable mental retards like Dimsman, Hornbeck, Porky the
Pig and Mr Dickhard.

All you are Bob Cain is the porcine prince of fools.



............ Phil







  #31   Report Post  
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...


Bob Cain wrote:

Jim, you've shown that you are _really_ good at getting the skinny on
people. Could you be persuaded to turn those talents on this creep?


Oh, before someone offed him his name was Gary Sokolich.


I figured that out myself. The person to ask is Angelo Campanella. It seems
he met up with Dr. W. Gary Sokolich in Newport Beach, California, a few
years back (public information in the newsgroups posted by Sokolich
himself).

All I can say is that from reading his posting history, he spent a few years
****ing off people left and right. He has been in numerous ****ing matches
with different people. Several people resorted to reporting him to his ISP.
Around January of 2002 he just disappeared. It seems he stayed away since
the word "contemptable" (sic) did not appear in alt.sci.physics.acoustics
again until The Ghost started posting. The only other posting of that
spelling was by Sokolich right before he disappeared.

Another of his favorite terms is "nonsensical drivel", which has appeared in
a.s.p.a. only a few times by two persons: Sokolich and The Ghost. Same goes
for the work "scumbag."

The guy spent a few years in senseless personal attacks. It's best if he is
just ignored.


  #32   Report Post  
Randy Yates
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stewart Pinkerton writes:
[...]
I do find posturing by those who hide behind pseudonyms, to be as
risible as it is sad and cowardly.


Hear hear. I agree, Stewart. People who do this always have a strike
against them from the get-go in my book.

PS: Marvelous word, "risible" - from the Latin "ridere" - "to laugh."
--
% Randy Yates % "I met someone who looks alot like you,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % she does the things you do,
%%% 919-577-9882 % but she is an IBM."
%%%% % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
  #33   Report Post  
Natalie Drest
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Randy Yates" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton writes:
[...]
I do find posturing by those who hide behind pseudonyms, to be as
risible as it is sad and cowardly.


Hear hear. I agree, Stewart. People who do this always have a strike
against them from the get-go in my book.

PS: Marvelous word, "risible" - from the Latin "ridere" - "to laugh."


Yes, they always make me laugh when I pour the milk on & they make that tiny
popping sound


--
"I won't go into binary counting here. For further information you can
search the Internet, or cut off all but one of your fingers."
-Roger Nichols


  #34   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 00:25:52 +1000, "Natalie Drest"
wrote:


"Randy Yates" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton writes:
[...]
I do find posturing by those who hide behind pseudonyms, to be as
risible as it is sad and cowardly.


Hear hear. I agree, Stewart. People who do this always have a strike
against them from the get-go in my book.

PS: Marvelous word, "risible" - from the Latin "ridere" - "to laugh."


Yes, they always make me laugh when I pour the milk on & they make that tiny
popping sound


Isn't that bicycles?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
  #35   Report Post  
Randy Yates
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Natalie Drest" writes:

"Randy Yates" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton writes:
[...]
I do find posturing by those who hide behind pseudonyms, to be as
risible as it is sad and cowardly.


Hear hear. I agree, Stewart. People who do this always have a strike
against them from the get-go in my book.

PS: Marvelous word, "risible" - from the Latin "ridere" - "to laugh."


Yes, they always make me laugh when I pour the milk on & they make that tiny
popping sound


Many parts of a pine tree are edible.
--
Randy Yates
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications
Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
, 919-472-1124


  #36   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message

news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
Why are
people getting so personal with him?


1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks
Need I continue?


That simply sounds like you have a personal axe to grind.


  #37   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...
"Bob Cain"

Phil Allison wrote:


** No - but why stop when you are on a roll ?

Don't forget to mention that Bob Cain is:


4) A pathological narcissist

5) A fallacious reasoner

6) A boaster and a troll

7) A grandiose liar

8) A public masturbator


Ah, I know I've arrived when I get personal insults from
Phil Allison.



** You have arrived in hell - along with the other vermin and sub human
scum that infest Usenet.


You, Phil, are a man without peer. Your choice
of past targets puts me in excellent company indeed.



** Sure thing - right along with parrots like Rivers, congenital

liars
like Dorsey and innumerable mental retards like Dimsman, Hornbeck, Porky

the
Pig and Mr Dickhard.

All you are Bob Cain is the porcine prince of fools.



Phuck you Phil, you are a phool! If your brain were placed on the sharp
edge of a razor blade it would look like a BB rolling down a four lane
highway! *ROFLMAO*

(Sorry folks, but I think everyone here, including The Ghost, knows that
this clown deserves whatever he gets.) Mr Ghost, you could increase your
credibility here if you would join us in denouncing Phil.


  #38   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 19:39:10 -0700, "Jim Carr"
wrote:

"The Ghost" wrote in message
. com...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message

news:A4wYc.10498$bT1.6671@fed1read07...
Why are
people getting so personal with him?

1) He's technically inept
2) He's an arrogant asshole
3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks
Need I continue?


Is somebody grumpy because Disney Channel has been running repeats all
summer?


Also Dopey and Sleepy? :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


*LOL* He certainly isn't Happy or Bashful! :-)


  #39   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"The Ghost" wrote in message
om...
"Jim Carr" wrote in message

news:a_vYc.10497$bT1.5880@fed1read07...

I, for one, think Bob will admit he's wrong if in fact he is proven so.

From
where I sit I haven't seen him proven wrong. I see Bob as FINALLY

getting
someone to produce what he has been requesting for weeks.


No, Bob Cain is finally getting someone to produce the obvious.
Furthermore, Bob Cain's overly-inflated ego will never allow him to
admit that he is wrong.


I've also seen some very insecure people such as yourself get their

panties
in a bunch because someone dared question the status quo.


Obviously, you dimwit moron, you don't know me and you don't know the
meaning of insecure. The fact of the matter is that I have forgotten
more than you and your mindless compadres in these audio groups will,
combined, ever know. So, stick that up your ****ing insecure ass and
smoke it.


Oh boy, did you ever pick the wrong person to insult! I found out the
hard way that if you **** Jim off, it's like picking on a pit bull, When he
latches on, he doesn't let go! Sic'em Jim! *LOL*


  #40   Report Post  
Porky
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Carr" wrote in message
news:16U_c.75189$yh.3745@fed1read05...
"Bob Cain" wrote in message
...


Bob Cain wrote:

Jim, you've shown that you are _really_ good at getting the skinny on
people. Could you be persuaded to turn those talents on this creep?


Oh, before someone offed him his name was Gary Sokolich.


I figured that out myself. The person to ask is Angelo Campanella. It

seems
he met up with Dr. W. Gary Sokolich in Newport Beach, California, a few
years back (public information in the newsgroups posted by Sokolich
himself).

All I can say is that from reading his posting history, he spent a few

years
****ing off people left and right. He has been in numerous ****ing matches
with different people. Several people resorted to reporting him to his

ISP.
Around January of 2002 he just disappeared. It seems he stayed away since
the word "contemptable" (sic) did not appear in alt.sci.physics.acoustics
again until The Ghost started posting. The only other posting of that
spelling was by Sokolich right before he disappeared.

Another of his favorite terms is "nonsensical drivel", which has appeared

in
a.s.p.a. only a few times by two persons: Sokolich and The Ghost. Same

goes
for the work "scumbag."

The guy spent a few years in senseless personal attacks. It's best if he

is
just ignored.

Shucks Jim, I was hoping you'd go after him like you did me! :-) Maybe
he could be converted into a useful groupmember like I was... It certainly
seems that HE thinks he knows something about the subject, even if he's
contributed no evidence to that fact yet.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp? £ Î Z @ R Ð Pro Audio 183 November 16th 18 12:20 AM
Doppler Distoriton? Arny Krueger Tech 627 September 8th 04 03:14 AM
When did home theater take over? chexxon Audio Opinions 305 January 14th 04 11:50 PM
For Sale: Tube Driver Blue TDB475 ReedLom Car Audio 5 October 30th 03 02:49 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"