Customer Discussions > Science Fiction forum

"Star Trek" and Real Science


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 511 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 1:40:07 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 17, 2010 1:42:18 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
But, Marilyn, you did understand the point about Apple Computers above, right? DID YOU GET IT? You saw "http://homepage.mac.com/" and instead of checking into what it was or meant, you just assumed that I had a "special relationship" with Apple. Then you let your predilection for conspiracy theories get the better of you and connected that with the fact you couldn't find some message you thought you'd read here and VROOOM! you were off! Either I'm some kind of super-hacker now and deleting messages here on these forums, or by virtue of my "special relationship" with Amazon they're deleting them for me.

Do you NOT understand how whacko that is?

And this is just ONE MORE example of what you do ALL the time.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 3:53:50 PM PDT
Photoscribe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 5:09:59 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 17, 2010 5:54:23 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
Oh, is that the new spin, that my comments directed at the two of you are "unprovoked"? LOL. Wow... selective memories, huh?

Not really discussing any of the real issues, though, are you? :)

Edit: I mean, whether I have no friends at all or thousands is as irrelevant as my physical appearance to the validity of the comments I make, no? Marilyn doesn't pay attention to what she reads and lets herself be unduly influenced by her preconceived notions. The Apple Computers thing is just another CLASSIC (to use her word) example. (Note that she is refusing to admit her mistake or even acknowledge it. I wouldn't be surprised if she's put me on ignore again. An option which is always, of course, available to anyone.)

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 6:39:39 PM PDT
Photoscribe says:
Originally, sunshine....your comments WERE unprovoked!! They STILL are!!

Don't attempt to tell anybody differently, either!!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 8:14:52 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
Hey, sugarplum, YOU people are the ones into denial and creative editing of the past, not me. :)

You know, I'm a bit envious of M. Helsdon, since he can actually pinpoint the date and time where Marilyn turned nasty on him, and even quote the comments. I just vaguely remember pointing out some silliness or other in one of her posts here somewhere... I doubt she remembers what or where it was, either, poor thing. Anyway... that's ALL it took.

As for you... the first recollection I have is when you were demonstrating your superior math skills in arguing with Helsdon... something about devastating tsunamis following everyone in the world jumping into the air at the same time? LOL

Posted on Oct 17, 2010 8:17:17 PM PDT
SandRider says:
okay, Steven, tell you what: let's go ahead and try a test-case right here and now ...

I'll bet all the money in your bank account that you are now talking out of the side of your neck:
>>"So often, they laugh at legal threats, but I wonder what would happen if you called them on it.... What they do could EASILY be construed and proven as harassment, and with all the cyber-bullying legislation being passed these days, their shenanigans could EASILY be brought to bear, reducing them to the pipsqueaks they probably are to begin with."<<

let's take these definitions of "defamation" as the base-line:
[quote]
# Ron Hankin, Navigating the Legal Minefield of Private Investigations: A Career-Saving Guide for Private Investigators, Detectives, And Security Police, Looseleaf Law Publications, 2008, p. 59. "There are five essential elements to defamation: (1) The accusation is false; and (2) it impeaches the subject's character; and (3) it is published to a third person; and (4) it damages the reputation of the subject; and (5) that the accusation is done intentionally or with fault such as wanton disregard of facts."
# Roger LeRoy Miller, Gaylord A. Jentz, Business Law Today: The Essentials, Cengage Learning, 2007, p. 115. "In other words, making a negative statement about another person is not defamation unless the statement is false and represents something as a fact (for example, 'Vladik cheats on his taxes') rather than a personal opinion (for example, 'Vladik is a jerk')."
# Michael G. Parkinson, L. Marie Parkinson, Law for advertising, broadcasting, journalism, and public relations, Routledge, 2006, p. 273. "Simplifying a very complicated decision, the court said that because the plaintiff must prove a statement is false in order to win an action in defamation, it is impossible to win an action in defamation if the statement, by its very nature, cannot be proven false."
# Edward Lee Lamoureux, Steven L. Baron, Claire Stewart, Intellectual property law and interactive media: free for a fee, Peter Lang, 2009, p. 190. "A statement can only be defamatory if it is false; therefore true statements of fact about others, regardless of the damage rendered, are not defamatory (although such comments might represent other sorts of privacy or hate speech violations). Defamation may occur when one party (the eventual defendant if a case goes forward) writes or says something that is false about a second party (plaintiff) such that some third party "receives" the communication, and the communication of false information damages the plaintiff"
[/quote]

given that then, I, the SandRider, do hereby on the public forum of http://amazon.com, do state, to God and the World at large, that:

>Steven Turner is a pedophile, and on the registered sex offenders list of three states. The charges stemmed from an investigation at a Philadelphia newspaper,
where Turner was employed as a photographer, when negatives of photos of sadistic sex acts being performed on male infants were discovered. After first
denying the negatives were from his camera, and blaming several of his colleagues, to the point of committing perjury in concocting an elaborate series of
lies to attempt to implicate an innocent man, Turner eventually confessed to possession of the film, but denied he was the fat white male in the photos,
or that he had been at the location indicated in the photos at the time the photos were made. Being unable to conclusively prove Turner's actual involvement
in the sex crimes recorded by the film in his possession, Philadelphia authorities charged Turner with possession and distribution of child pornography, and
accepted a plea bargain which resulted in lifetime monitored probation and lifetime registration on the tri-county sex offenders list; as of this writing, however,
sources with the Philadelphia Police Department say they are continuing the investigation of the incident, and further charges could be pending."

now.
if you want to play hardball with this issue, I'm willing to post this on all the reviews of all your books on amazon,
and would even be willing to start a "Steven Turner is a Child Rapist" discussion here in this forum ...

so you go gather up your lawyers, guns, & money, and ... sue me. I dare you.

I double-dog dare you.

First tho, before you get laughed out of an attorney's office, let's see how successful you are at getting amazon to release my personal information to you,
so you can atleast provide the "FBI Cybertask Force" with a real name, and not just "some mean old troll on the internet". When you fail at that, you should
atleast try to get me banned from amazon ... well, try to get this account banned, anyway ...

good night & good luck !

Posted on Oct 17, 2010 8:27:08 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 27, 2011 2:00:21 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 8:36:39 PM PDT
TO: Marilyn Martin

RE: Your latest article

I especially liked, for example, "...that lesser class of criminals called advertisers." Although I wonder if the following is really true, "But for most adults, who already possess the precise thought processes and grasp of English..."

Anyway, another excellent article! As Oprah would say, "You go, girl!"

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 8:41:06 PM PDT
TO: Ronald Craig

RE: "(Walter, are you playing?...)"

No, I am not playing. All I did was provide a little clarification without casting aspersions.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 8:59:48 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 27, 2011 2:00:23 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 9:02:03 PM PDT
TO: Photoscribe

RE: "Geeks...YUCK!"

[tongue-in-cheek] So-o-o-o, what's wrong with geeks? I was a geek back when it was called being a "square." I was a computer geek when "computer" was synonymous with "mainframe." I've always read books, am the world's greatest sport NON-fan [I once went 6 weeks without knowing - or caring - who won the Super Bowl] and have never watched an episode of Seinfeld. All that would make me practically un-American in some circles - or, at the very least,...weird.
Is that "geek" enough for ya? (smile)

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 9:19:03 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
Sure. Just keep the clueless from posting nonsense all the time.

Or at least ask them to voice their ignorance in the form of questions, and to be grateful for the answers, whether said answers conform to their preconceived notions or not.

This topic was pretty much talked out LAST September. (Go back through and look at the gaps between the spurts of posts.) IS there anything more to be said?

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 9:29:42 PM PDT
TO: CivWar64 (Bob)

RE: "Inspired by Science Fiction"

Thanks for the link. Excellent!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 9:35:19 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 27, 2011 2:00:25 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 9:48:39 PM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
A new thread on the same topic with a more intelligently phrased OP, you mean?

That might be interesting.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 10:02:20 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 27, 2011 2:00:26 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 11:20:59 PM PDT
Photoscribe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2010 11:40:51 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 18, 2010 12:05:32 AM PDT
Photoscribe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 12:29:52 AM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
"...And since we'll probably never know exactly what would happen if people DID jump up and down in unison"

Ah, but we can form some pretty good hypotheses based on our current level of knowledge about our planet and the universe, basic physics and geology. THAT's what Science is all about. As I recall, you were having a good deal of trouble grasping a simple comparison of quantities expressed in scientific notation. :)

I may not have the most exciting life out of six billion-some, but then again, I haven't spent the last how-many years of mine writing and flogging some very badly written books... like *some* people.

And I expected exactly the response I got: whinin' razzes. LOL

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 12:31:38 AM PDT
Photoscribe says:
TO: Photoscribe

RE: "Geeks...YUCK!"

[tongue-in-cheek] So-o-o-o, what's wrong with geeks? I was a geek back when it was called being a "square." I was a computer geek when "computer" was synonymous with "mainframe." I've always read books, am the world's greatest sport NON-fan [I once went 6 weeks without knowing - or caring - who won the Super Bowl] and have never watched an episode of Seinfeld. All that would make me practically un-American in some circles - or, at the very least,...weird.
Is that "geek" enough for ya? (smile)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Easy, Walter....I only meant UNLIKEABLE geeks, m'man....!

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 1:38:03 AM PDT
Photoscribe says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 4:54:54 AM PDT
Hi Wlater!

Thanks for reading my humor essay. Glad you got a chuckle.

As for this discussion now seriously off-topic, it'll simmer down after awhile. And I'll then post something ON topic, and we'll be off and running again.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 7:39:34 AM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
"I GUARANTEE you there would be some sort of worldwide geological repercussion"

YOU guarantee it, do you? LOL. That's just like Marilyn's accusing people of being "Amazon-paid attack trolls": your simply stating it does not make it true. You have to have EVIDENCE. In the case of the six billion jumping beings, you need to model the situation mathematically and provide a logical argument. "Listen, jerk... I GUARANTEE..." may cut it in your neck of the woods, but not in mine. :)

"And I'll bet you haven't read more than one paragraph of any one of them have you"

Actually, I read the first page of the first one again just this morning. (Also retyped it out, as a matter of fact, and posted it on a private board for some of my friends to laugh at.) That was about two and a half or three paragraphs, so you lose that bet. :)

"Shut up."

Well! That's the perfect conclusion to your comment: all emotion and no logical thought. Such a ray of sunshine! But not very persuasive.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 18, 2010 7:40:49 AM PDT
Ronald Craig says:
That's nice, Marilyn. :)

You did understand about my "special relationship" with Apple Computers, yes?

Posted on Oct 18, 2010 9:26:48 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 18, 2010 9:28:13 AM PDT
In attempts to get this thread back on topic ...

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/10/mchip-enables-tricorder.html

Actually, it was Spock that had the Tricorder, but there is a new handheld medical device called a lab-on-a-chip. A drop of blood and fifteen minutes for results. This could revolutionize medical diagnoses on the street or in remote areas.

(And, for the record, I never called RC a "Amazon-paid attack-troll". Just more inflammatory gibberish so he can get attention at any cost ...)
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science Fiction forum
Participants:  36
Total posts:  511
Initial post:  Sep 24, 2009
Latest post:  Jul 29, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers

Search Customer Discussions