Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Carr" wrote in message news:a_vYc.10497$bT1.5880@fed1read07...
I, for one, think Bob will admit he's wrong if in fact he is proven so. From where I sit I haven't seen him proven wrong. I see Bob as FINALLY getting someone to produce what he has been requesting for weeks. No, Bob Cain is finally getting someone to produce the obvious. Furthermore, Bob Cain's overly-inflated ego will never allow him to admit that he is wrong. I've also seen some very insecure people such as yourself get their panties in a bunch because someone dared question the status quo. Obviously, you dimwit moron, you don't know me and you don't know the meaning of insecure. The fact of the matter is that I have forgotten more than you and your mindless compadres in these audio groups will, combined, ever know. So, stick that up your ****ing insecure ass and smoke it. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"The Ghost" "Jim Carr" Why are people getting so personal with him? 1) He's technically inept 2) He's an arrogant asshole 3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks Need I continue? ** No - but why stop when you are on a roll ? Don't forget to mention that Bob Cain is: 4) A pathological narcissist 5) A fallacious reasoner 6) A boaster and a troll 7) A grandiose liar 8) A public masturbator .......... Phil |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"The Ghost" wrote in message
om... "Jim Carr" wrote in message news:A4wYc.10498$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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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$bT1.6671@fed1read07... Why are people getting so personal with him? 1) He's technically inept 2) He's an arrogant asshole 3) Payback for his ad hominem attacks Need I continue? Is somebody grumpy because Disney Channel has been running repeats all summer? Also Dopey and Sleepy? :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering *LOL* He certainly isn't Happy or Bashful! :-) |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"The Ghost" wrote in message om... "Jim Carr" wrote in message news:a_vYc.10497$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
|
|||
|
|||
"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 | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Recommend a ~$400 2-channel tube mic-preamp? | Pro Audio | |||
Doppler Distoriton? | Tech | |||
When did home theater take over? | Audio Opinions | |||
For Sale: Tube Driver Blue TDB475 | Car Audio |