"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 15:49:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

" wrote in message
link.net...
Here you can find the article I was trying to find earlier.
I forgot I posted the whole thing a while back under the tread
title,
"A
bit
form the BBC."

You can find the entire article he

http://www.allaudios.org/detail-10016725.html

I haven't found a specific reference to ABX yet, ( I may have
misremember
that bit) but at least one to double blind testing.

You're imagining it, as inferior minds are prone to do.


Inferior minds, are the ones that think they have to point out how
much
smarter they think they are, when all the evidence points to them not
only
being less smart than they think, but being in complete denial of
reality.

Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol, shows
you
are completely disconnected from reality.

You are dismissed.

Mikey, there's a spurious comma in the above sentence.

Yes, but you have to admit that Mike's post on the whole demonstrates
a modicum of intelligence. Use of the words "efficacy" and "protocol"
(both correctly spelt) are definitely good signs. I think, along with
chastisement for errors, praise for effort should be applied.
Otherwise other posters might get the idea you don't appreciate the
attempts of a creature like the Mckelphibian to raise itself on the
evolutionary ladder, which might indicate that you yourself missed a
rung on the way up. Fair's fair, Robert. :-)

Paul, the talent of the mckelviphibian for mimicry has been noted by
amphibian biologists. While further research should be conducted, I am
inclined to think that the verbiage you have noted is part of the Arny
Krueger phrasebook. However, I support the desire of all of God's
creatures
to better themselves, so here, rewritten, appears the sentence as it
should
have in the first place:
"Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the ABX protocol is
indicative of your skeptical nature."
And (as Churchill would say) with that, I could not agree more.

But that would changing the meaning.
Your denial of the efficacy and reliability of the the ABX protocol is
indicative of the fact that you are not only unscientific, but in serious
denial.