On 1/28/2024 7:35 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 08:09:20 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, January 28, 2024 at 8:03:06?AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/28/2024 9:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>> On 1/28/2024 10:29 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/27/2024 5:48 PM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/27/2024 6:13 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 13:47:55 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
>>>>>>> <je...@cruzio.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 12:10:27 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
>>>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 4:10:14?AM UTC-8, zen
>>>>>>>>> cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/27/2024 12:31 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:15:16?PM UTC-8,
>>>>>>>>>>> Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/2024 7:49 PM, AK wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:38:55?PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-6, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cQ0NK1T64
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is the relevance?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you think about keeping things positive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of trying to creat division?
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is just tommy showing how he wishes more
>>>>>>>>>>>> people would psot cycling
>>>>>>>>>>>> related topics:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:09:54 AM UTC-5,
>>>>>>>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/986D_mm3Twk/m/NTbOFqXWAQAJ
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This Group would be a far better place without the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stupid five..
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The cite would return to information MOSTLY but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not entirely about
>>>>>>>>>>>> bicycles as it was when Jobst moderated it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Add xx to reply
>>>>>>>>>>> No, it is simply showing that there no lie that you
>>>>>>>>>>> won't tell people to prove that you're important.
>>>>>>>>>>> You aren't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> lol...and you think you're going to prove that with
>>>>>>>>>> some bullshit from
>>>>>>>>>> YouTube? Gawd yer an idiot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some "bullshit from YouTube" is a big improvement over
>>>>>>>> your total lack
>>>>>>>> of proof, substantiation, sources and real numbers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nothing I've written here - at any time - boasts of
>>>>>>>>>> any importance on my
>>>>>>>>>> part. You _constantly_ write (lie) about how rich,
>>>>>>>>>> intelligent,
>>>>>>>>>> successful, and accomplished you are on a daily
>>>>>>>>>> basis, then go and post
>>>>>>>>>> ' the dent in my top tube popped out from riding the
>>>>>>>>>> bike' and 'PWM is a
>>>>>>>>>> common method of testing cables'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 26 days and counting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If I boast about how wealthy and accomplished I am it
>>>>>>>>> is because I am.
>>>>>>>>> If I say that you're a weak stupid fool, it is only
>>>>>>>>> because you are.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tom, you are apparently looking for some sort of
>>>>>>>> acclaim, recognition,
>>>>>>>> reverence, adulation or worship from the readers of
>>>>>>>> RBT. You want to
>>>>>>>> be recognized as being wealthy, successful, knowledgeable,
>>>>>>>> experienced, intelligent etc. Yet, the method by which
>>>>>>>> you try to
>>>>>>>> achieve this is to insult the very readers whom you
>>>>>>>> want to impress
>>>>>>>> with your wealth, success, knowledge, experience,
>>>>>>>> intelligence etc. I
>>>>>>>> would think that is rather counter productive. If I
>>>>>>>> wanted to impress
>>>>>>>> your readers, the very last thing I would do is insult
>>>>>>>> them or lie to
>>>>>>>> them. On Usenet, anyone who can write more than one
>>>>>>>> complete sentence
>>>>>>>> is (in my opinion) in the upper 20% of the USA in
>>>>>>>> intelligence. That
>>>>>>>> means they're also smart enough to notice multiple
>>>>>>>> problems with your
>>>>>>>> comments and probably be suspicious of your
>>>>>>>> credibility. Your obvious
>>>>>>>> lies and insults simply verify this suspicion. You
>>>>>>>> might want to try
>>>>>>>> a different strategy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to
>>>>>>>> speak and to
>>>>>>>> remove all doubt" (Generally wrongly to Abraham Lincoln)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been sort of keeping score and I'm becoming to
>>>>>>> believe that I
>>>>>>> have discovered a "Universal Truth".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "If you take any statement made by Tom, or his blond
>>>>>>> haired Leader,
>>>>>>> and reverse the meaning, you will discovered the truth."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom alleges "Voter Fraud". If you reverse this to NO
>>>>>>> voter fraud, you
>>>>>>> will find that it agrees with the finding of some 60
>>>>>>> court cases
>>>>>>> brought by the "red necktie brigade".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in America, they are referred to as "magatards"
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for confirming Jamie Diamond's analysis.
>>>>
>>>> I wasnt aware that Jamie Diamond made any political statements
>>>>
>>>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
>>> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left
>>> wing reportage:
>>>
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
>>> --
>>> Andrew Muzi
>>> a...@yellowjersey.org
>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> Krygowski and Flunky aren't bright enough to know what is going on and one wonders what they're going to do as Trump is one of the massive election wins of the century. We can be fairly certain that Liebermann will say that he was always for Trump.
>
>
> It would seem to say something about the U.S. when a bloke who's
> crowning endeavor seems to be sexually assaulting women in Department
> Stores is forecast a massive election win "of the century".
>

On 1/29/2024 8:07 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/28/2024 9:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>> On 1/28/2024 10:29 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/27/2024 5:48 PM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 1/27/2024 6:13 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 13:47:55 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
>>>>>> <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 12:10:27 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
>>>>>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 4:10:14?AM UTC-8,
>>>>>>>> zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/27/2024 12:31 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:15:16?PM UTC-8,
>>>>>>>>>> Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/2024 7:49 PM, AK wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:38:55?PM
>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-6, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cQ0NK1T64
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What is the relevance?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you think about keeping things positive
>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of trying to creat division?
>>>>>>>>>>> This is just tommy showing how he wishes more
>>>>>>>>>>> people would psot cycling
>>>>>>>>>>> related topics:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:09:54 AM
>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/986D_mm3Twk/m/NTbOFqXWAQAJ
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This Group would be a far better place without
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Stupid five..
>>>>>>>>>>>> The cite would return to information MOSTLY but
>>>>>>>>>>>> not entirely about
>>>>>>>>>>> bicycles as it was when Jobst moderated it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Add xx to reply
>>>>>>>>>> No, it is simply showing that there no lie that
>>>>>>>>>> you won't tell people to prove that you're
>>>>>>>>>> important. You aren't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> lol...and you think you're going to prove that with
>>>>>>>>> some bullshit from
>>>>>>>>> YouTube? Gawd yer an idiot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some "bullshit from YouTube" is a big improvement
>>>>>>> over your total lack
>>>>>>> of proof, substantiation, sources and real numbers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nothing I've written here - at any time - boasts of
>>>>>>>>> any importance on my
>>>>>>>>> part. You _constantly_ write (lie) about how rich,
>>>>>>>>> intelligent,
>>>>>>>>> successful, and accomplished you are on a daily
>>>>>>>>> basis, then go and post
>>>>>>>>> ' the dent in my top tube popped out from riding
>>>>>>>>> the bike' and 'PWM is a
>>>>>>>>> common method of testing cables'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 26 days and counting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If I boast about how wealthy and accomplished I am
>>>>>>>> it is because I am.
>>>>>>>> If I say that you're a weak stupid fool, it is only
>>>>>>>> because you are.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom, you are apparently looking for some sort of
>>>>>>> acclaim, recognition,
>>>>>>> reverence, adulation or worship from the readers of
>>>>>>> RBT. You want to
>>>>>>> be recognized as being wealthy, successful,
>>>>>>> knowledgeable,
>>>>>>> experienced, intelligent etc.  Yet, the method by
>>>>>>> which you try to
>>>>>>> achieve this is to insult the very readers whom you
>>>>>>> want to impress
>>>>>>> with your wealth, success, knowledge, experience,
>>>>>>> intelligence etc.  I
>>>>>>> would think that is rather counter productive.  If I
>>>>>>> wanted to impress
>>>>>>> your readers, the very last thing I would do is
>>>>>>> insult them or lie to
>>>>>>> them.  On Usenet, anyone who can write more than one
>>>>>>> complete sentence
>>>>>>> is (in my opinion) in the upper 20% of the USA in
>>>>>>> intelligence.  That
>>>>>>> means they're also smart enough to notice multiple
>>>>>>> problems with your
>>>>>>> comments and probably be suspicious of your
>>>>>>> credibility. Your obvious
>>>>>>> lies and insults simply verify this suspicion.  You
>>>>>>> might want to try
>>>>>>> a different strategy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than
>>>>>>> to speak and to
>>>>>>> remove all doubt"  (Generally wrongly to Abraham
>>>>>>> Lincoln)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been sort of keeping score and I'm becoming to
>>>>>> believe that  I
>>>>>> have  discovered a "Universal Truth".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If you take any statement made by Tom, or his blond
>>>>>> haired Leader,
>>>>>> and reverse the meaning, you  will discovered the truth."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom alleges "Voter Fraud". If you reverse this to NO
>>>>>> voter fraud, you
>>>>>> will find that it agrees with the finding of some 60
>>>>>> court cases
>>>>>> brought by the  "red necktie brigade".
>>>>>
>>>>> in America, they are referred to as "magatards"
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for confirming Jamie Diamond's analysis.
>>>
>>> I wasnt aware that Jamie Diamond made any political
>>> statements
>>>
>>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
>>
>> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left
>> wing reportage:
>>
>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
>>
>
> ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians
> that painting trump supporters with a broad brush is done so
> at their own peril.
>
> I am under no such peril.

Duly noted.
I am not offended by being called a magatard; I've been
called worse. Meh.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 6:07:16 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 1/28/2024 9:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
> >> On 1/28/2024 10:29 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 1/27/2024 5:48 PM, zen cycle wrote:
> >>>> On 1/27/2024 6:13 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 13:47:55 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 12:10:27 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> >>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 4:10:14?AM UTC-8, zen cycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 1/27/2024 12:31 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:15:16?PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/2024 7:49 PM, AK wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:38:55?PM UTC-6, Tom
> >>>>>>>>>>> Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cQ0NK1T64
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What is the relevance?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Can you think about keeping things positive instead of trying
> >>>>>>>>>>> to creat division?
> >>>>>>>>>> This is just tommy showing how he wishes more people would
> >>>>>>>>>> psot cycling
> >>>>>>>>>> related topics:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:09:54 AM UTC-5,
> >>>>>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/986D_mm3Twk/m/NTbOFqXWAQAJ
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This Group would be a far better place without the Stupid five..
> >>>>>>>>>>> The cite would return to information MOSTLY but not entirely
> >>>>>>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>>>>> bicycles as it was when Jobst moderated it.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Add xx to reply
> >>>>>>>>> No, it is simply showing that there no lie that you won't tell
> >>>>>>>>> people to prove that you're important. You aren't.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> lol...and you think you're going to prove that with some
> >>>>>>>> bullshit from
> >>>>>>>> YouTube? Gawd yer an idiot.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Some "bullshit from YouTube" is a big improvement over your total
> >>>>>> lack
> >>>>>> of proof, substantiation, sources and real numbers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Nothing I've written here - at any time - boasts of any
> >>>>>>>> importance on my
> >>>>>>>> part. You _constantly_ write (lie) about how rich, intelligent,
> >>>>>>>> successful, and accomplished you are on a daily basis, then go
> >>>>>>>> and post
> >>>>>>>> ' the dent in my top tube popped out from riding the bike' and
> >>>>>>>> 'PWM is a
> >>>>>>>> common method of testing cables'.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 26 days and counting.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If I boast about how wealthy and accomplished I am it is because
> >>>>>>> I am.
> >>>>>>> If I say that you're a weak stupid fool, it is only because you are.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Tom, you are apparently looking for some sort of acclaim,
> >>>>>> recognition,
> >>>>>> reverence, adulation or worship from the readers of RBT. You want to
> >>>>>> be recognized as being wealthy, successful, knowledgeable,
> >>>>>> experienced, intelligent etc. Yet, the method by which you try to
> >>>>>> achieve this is to insult the very readers whom you want to impress
> >>>>>> with your wealth, success, knowledge, experience, intelligence
> >>>>>> etc. I
> >>>>>> would think that is rather counter productive. If I wanted to
> >>>>>> impress
> >>>>>> your readers, the very last thing I would do is insult them or lie to
> >>>>>> them. On Usenet, anyone who can write more than one complete
> >>>>>> sentence
> >>>>>> is (in my opinion) in the upper 20% of the USA in intelligence. That
> >>>>>> means they're also smart enough to notice multiple problems with your
> >>>>>> comments and probably be suspicious of your credibility. Your obvious
> >>>>>> lies and insults simply verify this suspicion. You might want to try
> >>>>>> a different strategy.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to
> >>>>>> remove all doubt" (Generally wrongly to Abraham Lincoln)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've been sort of keeping score and I'm becoming to believe that I
> >>>>> have discovered a "Universal Truth".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "If you take any statement made by Tom, or his blond haired Leader,
> >>>>> and reverse the meaning, you will discovered the truth."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tom alleges "Voter Fraud". If you reverse this to NO voter fraud, you
> >>>>> will find that it agrees with the finding of some 60 court cases
> >>>>> brought by the "red necktie brigade".
> >>>>
> >>>> in America, they are referred to as "magatards"
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for confirming Jamie Diamond's analysis.
> >>
> >> I wasnt aware that Jamie Diamond made any political statements
> >>
> >> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
> >
> > It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left wing reportage:
> >
> > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
> >
> ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians that painting
> trump supporters with a broad brush is done so at their own peril.
>
> I am under no such peril.
> --
> Add xx to reply
Seems to me that he was speaking directly to you. Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 6:22:42 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/29/2024 8:07 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 1/28/2024 9:43 AM, zen cycle wrote:
> >>> On 1/28/2024 10:29 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>> On 1/27/2024 5:48 PM, zen cycle wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/27/2024 6:13 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 13:47:55 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
> >>>>>> <je...@cruzio.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 12:10:27 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> >>>>>>> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 4:10:14?AM UTC-8,
> >>>>>>>> zen cycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 1/27/2024 12:31 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 2:15:16?PM UTC-8,
> >>>>>>>>>> Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/2024 7:49 PM, AK wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 5:38:55?PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-6, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cQ0NK1T64
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What is the relevance?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Can you think about keeping things positive
> >>>>>>>>>>>> instead of trying to creat division?
> >>>>>>>>>>> This is just tommy showing how he wishes more
> >>>>>>>>>>> people would psot cycling
> >>>>>>>>>>> related topics:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:09:54 AM
> >>>>>>>>>>> UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/986D_mm3Twk/m/NTbOFqXWAQAJ
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> This Group would be a far better place without
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the Stupid five..
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The cite would return to information MOSTLY but
> >>>>>>>>>>>> not entirely about
> >>>>>>>>>>> bicycles as it was when Jobst moderated it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Add xx to reply
> >>>>>>>>>> No, it is simply showing that there no lie that
> >>>>>>>>>> you won't tell people to prove that you're
> >>>>>>>>>> important. You aren't.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> lol...and you think you're going to prove that with
> >>>>>>>>> some bullshit from
> >>>>>>>>> YouTube? Gawd yer an idiot.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Some "bullshit from YouTube" is a big improvement
> >>>>>>> over your total lack
> >>>>>>> of proof, substantiation, sources and real numbers.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Nothing I've written here - at any time - boasts of
> >>>>>>>>> any importance on my
> >>>>>>>>> part. You _constantly_ write (lie) about how rich,
> >>>>>>>>> intelligent,
> >>>>>>>>> successful, and accomplished you are on a daily
> >>>>>>>>> basis, then go and post
> >>>>>>>>> ' the dent in my top tube popped out from riding
> >>>>>>>>> the bike' and 'PWM is a
> >>>>>>>>> common method of testing cables'.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 26 days and counting.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If I boast about how wealthy and accomplished I am
> >>>>>>>> it is because I am.
> >>>>>>>> If I say that you're a weak stupid fool, it is only
> >>>>>>>> because you are.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Tom, you are apparently looking for some sort of
> >>>>>>> acclaim, recognition,
> >>>>>>> reverence, adulation or worship from the readers of
> >>>>>>> RBT. You want to
> >>>>>>> be recognized as being wealthy, successful,
> >>>>>>> knowledgeable,
> >>>>>>> experienced, intelligent etc. Yet, the method by
> >>>>>>> which you try to
> >>>>>>> achieve this is to insult the very readers whom you
> >>>>>>> want to impress
> >>>>>>> with your wealth, success, knowledge, experience,
> >>>>>>> intelligence etc. I
> >>>>>>> would think that is rather counter productive. If I
> >>>>>>> wanted to impress
> >>>>>>> your readers, the very last thing I would do is
> >>>>>>> insult them or lie to
> >>>>>>> them. On Usenet, anyone who can write more than one
> >>>>>>> complete sentence
> >>>>>>> is (in my opinion) in the upper 20% of the USA in
> >>>>>>> intelligence. That
> >>>>>>> means they're also smart enough to notice multiple
> >>>>>>> problems with your
> >>>>>>> comments and probably be suspicious of your
> >>>>>>> credibility. Your obvious
> >>>>>>> lies and insults simply verify this suspicion. You
> >>>>>>> might want to try
> >>>>>>> a different strategy.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than
> >>>>>>> to speak and to
> >>>>>>> remove all doubt" (Generally wrongly to Abraham
> >>>>>>> Lincoln)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I've been sort of keeping score and I'm becoming to
> >>>>>> believe that I
> >>>>>> have discovered a "Universal Truth".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "If you take any statement made by Tom, or his blond
> >>>>>> haired Leader,
> >>>>>> and reverse the meaning, you will discovered the truth."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Tom alleges "Voter Fraud". If you reverse this to NO
> >>>>>> voter fraud, you
> >>>>>> will find that it agrees with the finding of some 60
> >>>>>> court cases
> >>>>>> brought by the "red necktie brigade".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> in America, they are referred to as "magatards"
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for confirming Jamie Diamond's analysis.
> >>>
> >>> I wasnt aware that Jamie Diamond made any political
> >>> statements
> >>>
> >>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
> >>
> >> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left
> >> wing reportage:
> >>
> >> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
> >>
> >
> > ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians
> > that painting trump supporters with a broad brush is done so
> > at their own peril.
> >
> > I am under no such peril.
> Duly noted.
> I am not offended by being called a magatard; I've been
> called worse. Meh.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> a...@yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
I think it humorous that the losers of the group call me a loser.Liebermann and Flunky lie simply because they can. I bet that Flunky has to take a flat into a shop to get it repaired. Liebermann who doesn't ride bicycles tells us that a wire on the road can't cause a flat. Flunky said that a razor blade couldn't as well but had no answer for the pictures showing a cut that couldn't have been caused by anything else

Am 29.01.2024 um 16:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:

> I think it humorous that the losers of the group call me a loser.
I don't know whether "humorous" is the right word when everywbody in the
USA seems to call everybody else a loser, a narcisist or a dumbass.
It turns discussions from information exchange to slagging matches.

On 1/29/2024 10:09 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 6:07:16 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
>>>
>>> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left wing reportage:
>>>
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
>>>
>> ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians that painting
>> trump supporters with a broad brush is done so at their own peril.
>>
>> I am under no such peril.
>> --
>> Add xx to reply
> Seems to me that he was speaking directly to you.

I'm not running for office, dipshit.

> Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.

that's your claim, not mine.
--
Add xx to reply

On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 8:12:22 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/29/2024 10:09 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 6:07:16 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >> On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
> >>>
> >>> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left wing reportage:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
> >>>
> >> ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians that painting
> >> trump supporters with a broad brush is done so at their own peril.
> >>
> >> I am under no such peril.
> >> --
> >> Add xx to reply
> > Seems to me that he was speaking directly to you.
> I'm not running for office, dipshit.
> > Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.
> that's your claim, not mine.
> --
> Add xx to reply
You're running from humanity.

On 1/29/2024 11:21 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 8:12:22 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 1/29/2024 10:09 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 29, 2024 at 6:07:16 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 1/28/2024 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> http://www.jamiegdiamond.com/statement.php
>>>>>
>>>>> It's been very newsy over this last week. Here's the left wing reportage:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/business/jamie-dimon-trump-maga/index.html
>>>>>
>>>> ISTM that Dimon was simply cautioning democrat politicians that painting
>>>> trump supporters with a broad brush is done so at their own peril.
>>>>
>>>> I am under no such peril.
>>>> --
>>>> Add xx to reply
>>> Seems to me that he was speaking directly to you.
>> I'm not running for office, dipshit.
>>> Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.
>> that's your claim, not mine.
>> --
>> Add xx to reply
> You're running from humanity.

You're a stain on humanity

--
Add xx to reply

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:09:29 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.

When I was researching possible treatments for prostate cancer in
2004-2007, I was finding far too many bogus medical papers, many of
which had been printed in allegedly reputable journals. Not much has
changed since then except that the volume of fake research papers has
increased.

"Websites Containing AI-Generated Fake Articles Increased Over 1,000%
Since May"
<https://mediarelations.gwu.edu/media-tip-sheet-websites-containing-ai-generated-fake-articles-increased-over-1000-may>

"Fake Publications in Biomedical Science: Red-flagging Method
Indicates Mass Production"
<https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.05.06.23289563v1.full>

More examples:

"Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common"
<https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common>

"Predatory Journals, Fake Conferences and Misleading Social Media: The
Dark Side of Medical Information"
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8015654/>

"Why Are So Many Studies Being Retracted?"
<https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/10/why-are-so-many-studies-being-retracted/>

"Medicine is plagued by untrustworthy clinical trials. How many
studies are faked or flawed?"
<https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02299-w>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 1/29/2024 12:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:09:29 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.
>
> When I was researching possible treatments for prostate cancer in
> 2004-2007, I was finding far too many bogus medical papers, many of
> which had been printed in allegedly reputable journals. Not much has
> changed since then except that the volume of fake research papers has
> increased.
>
> "Websites Containing AI-Generated Fake Articles Increased Over 1,000%
> Since May"
> <https://mediarelations.gwu.edu/media-tip-sheet-websites-containing-ai-generated-fake-articles-increased-over-1000-may>
>
> "Fake Publications in Biomedical Science: Red-flagging Method
> Indicates Mass Production"
> <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.05.06.23289563v1.full>
>
> More examples:
>
> "Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common"
> <https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common>
>
> "Predatory Journals, Fake Conferences and Misleading Social Media: The
> Dark Side of Medical Information"
> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8015654/>
>
> "Why Are So Many Studies Being Retracted?"
> <https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/10/why-are-so-many-studies-being-retracted/>
>
> "Medicine is plagued by untrustworthy clinical trials. How many
> studies are faked or flawed?"
> <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02299-w>
>

I listened to this over the weekend:
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-there-so-much-fraud-in-academia/

It claims, Ironically, the field of study with the most fraud was
studies of fraud in academia.

--
Add xx to reply

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:21:25 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>Liebermann who doesn't ride bicycles tells us that a wire on the road can't cause a flat.

It was your claim that people driving shredded car tires have littered
the roads with fire fragments which then inflicted six air leaks on
your tires and tubes.

(Jan 16, 2024)
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/eAEXNTV6WKg/m/allyQpo4AgAJ>
"I have four bikes down in the garage with flat tires and all of them
are the slow leaks indicative of worn out car tires shedding wires.
When I repair a pin hole flat the next ride is the same problem. One
of the tubes I was repairing had six of these micro holes in it."

Since it's your claim, it's not my job to prove that something is
false. I haven't found anything on the internet that suggests bicycle
tire damage from shredded car tires. It's your job, not mine, to
prove or demonstrate that the streets are littered with wire fragments
and that bicycle tires are being punctured by them.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 1/29/2024 11:17 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:09:29 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me more about how information taken directly from papers in medical journals are false.
>
> When I was researching possible treatments for prostate cancer in
> 2004-2007, I was finding far too many bogus medical papers, many of
> which had been printed in allegedly reputable journals. Not much has
> changed since then except that the volume of fake research papers has
> increased.
>
> "Websites Containing AI-Generated Fake Articles Increased Over 1,000%
> Since May"
> <https://mediarelations.gwu.edu/media-tip-sheet-websites-containing-ai-generated-fake-articles-increased-over-1000-may>
>
> "Fake Publications in Biomedical Science: Red-flagging Method
> Indicates Mass Production"
> <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.05.06.23289563v1.full>
>
> More examples:
>
> "Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common"
> <https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common>
>
> "Predatory Journals, Fake Conferences and Misleading Social Media: The
> Dark Side of Medical Information"
> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8015654/>
>
> "Why Are So Many Studies Being Retracted?"
> <https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/10/why-are-so-many-studies-being-retracted/>
>
> "Medicine is plagued by untrustworthy clinical trials. How many
> studies are faked or flawed?"
> <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02299-w>
>
>
>
>

+1
It's an absolute crisis and not only in medicine.
https://www.science.org/content/article/whistleblowers-flagged-300-scientific-papers-for-retraction-many-journals-ghosted-them
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/29/2024 10:41 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 29.01.2024 um 16:21 schrieb Tom Kunich:
>
>> I think it humorous that the losers of the group call me a loser.
> I don't know whether "humorous" is the right word when everywbody in the
> USA seems to call everybody else a loser, a narcisist or a dumbass.

Well, it's not everybody, trust me. You're reacting to the louder ones.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:26:25 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I listened to this over the weekend:
>https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-there-so-much-fraud-in-academia/
>
>It claims, Ironically, the field of study with the most fraud was
>studies of fraud in academia.

I can believe that. If you want to find corruption, just look at
those responsible for enforcing the rules and keeping everyone honest.

I've have exactly one experience helping a researcher with some RF
measurements requested by a peer reviewer. I don't want to tell the
entire story. Basically, my measurements demonstrated his
measurements and conclusions were very wrong[1]. He was ready to
publish and was horrified by my findings. Fortunately, he did the
right thing by destroying the erroneous data and starting over. I saw
no intent to deceive but rather some really sloppy lab work.

[1] Instead of measuring the RF field inside a test chamber for
exposing mice to controlled amounts of RF, he simply calculated what
the field strength should be and assumed that the mice were receiving
the calculated dosage. When I arrived with the required test
equipment, I found zero RF inside the test chamber. One of the patch
cables had a shorted connector. I have no idea where his numbers were
coming from, but I knew it wasn't from the attached RF signal source.

Drivel: While I was in high school, testing for marijuana effects was
a popular research topic. A friend's father was doing research in
this area for a university. The mice were expected to run a maze
before and after breathing marijuana smoke. The researchers were
seeing sufficiently spectacular increases in maze times after exposure
that everyone became suspicious. It seemed that breathing controlled
amounts of marijuana smoke was difficult to control. Instead, they
dissolved the THC in some alcohol and injected it directly into the
stomach of the mouse. The mice were trying to run the maze while
intoxicated and were predictably slowing down.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:21:25 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>I think it humorous that the losers of the group call me a loser.

I don't recall you ever posting anything humorous to RBT. How can you
claim that something is humorous when you obviously know nothing about
humor.

Your critics are correct in describing you a loser. You have lost all
credibility and trust.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 1/29/2024 1:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:26:25 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I listened to this over the weekend:
>> https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-there-so-much-fraud-in-academia/
>>
>> It claims, Ironically, the field of study with the most fraud was
>> studies of fraud in academia.
>
> I can believe that. If you want to find corruption, just look at
> those responsible for enforcing the rules and keeping everyone honest.
>
> I've have exactly one experience helping a researcher with some RF
> measurements requested by a peer reviewer. I don't want to tell the
> entire story. Basically, my measurements demonstrated his
> measurements and conclusions were very wrong[1]. He was ready to
> publish and was horrified by my findings. Fortunately, he did the
> right thing by destroying the erroneous data and starting over. I saw
> no intent to deceive but rather some really sloppy lab work.

It should be obvious that no system is perfect, including the process
used for evaluating scientific work. But it's quite a stretch to go from
acknowledging that imperfection, to saying that we can't know anything -
which seems to be the compulsion of various posters here.

It's another version of Andrew's common strategy: "Look at this example
from the extreme tail of the normal curve. That means that all the other
data has no value."

FWIW, I once ran into a "process imperfection" regarding peer review. I
submitted a minor paper on some engineering laboratory development for
publication in a minor educational journal. I got three reviews from
peers. Two were very complimentary. The third was astonishingly harsh,
claiming my paper had lots of spelling and grammar mistakes (it had
none) and should be completely rewritten or rejected. None of that
reviewer's comments gave a clue that he had actually read my paper.

I was fairly astonished and dismayed. I couldn't tell whether the
reviewer had somehow mixed his review of a different paper with mine, or
whether he just rattled off some toxic nonsense for some reason. But it
didn't matter in the end. The editor ultimately accepted my paper with
no changes.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 15:45:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/29/2024 1:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 12:26:25 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I listened to this over the weekend:
> >> https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is-there-so-much-fraud-in-academia/
> >>
> >> It claims, Ironically, the field of study with the most fraud was
> >> studies of fraud in academia.
> >
> > I can believe that. If you want to find corruption, just look at
> > those responsible for enforcing the rules and keeping everyone honest.
> >
> > I've have exactly one experience helping a researcher with some RF
> > measurements requested by a peer reviewer. I don't want to tell the
> > entire story. Basically, my measurements demonstrated his
> > measurements and conclusions were very wrong[1]. He was ready to
> > publish and was horrified by my findings. Fortunately, he did the
> > right thing by destroying the erroneous data and starting over. I saw
> > no intent to deceive but rather some really sloppy lab work.
>
>It should be obvious that no system is perfect, including the process
>used for evaluating scientific work. But it's quite a stretch to go from
>acknowledging that imperfection, to saying that we can't know anything -
>which seems to be the compulsion of various posters here.

Nothing can be known from believing that correlation indicates
causation, nor from heavily biased "stuidies."