Gappers convention

On Sep 29, 1:48*pm, pigo wrote:
On Sep 29, 12:31*pm, lal_truckee wrote:

On 9/29/10 10:41 AM, snowbender wrote:

And your out burst changing the subject proves you are a little domain
knowledge. Yes, I've learned the phrase "joint someone's conversation"
from CNN.

No doubt that's how you heard the phrase, but what CNN says regularly is
"join the conversation." No "t"

I'm pretty sure what you meant is "join."

Well that's what I was getting at. And one wouldn't have to hear it on
CNN. It's a pretty common phrase. And a basic understanding of English
would also tell someone that "join" is the proper use and context.
That "joint" either in the accepted version or the slang just doesn't
fit.

Oh well. What are you going to do when a polite questioning of it is
labled an "out burst" (I think it's outburst)?

Holy ****. Dispicable Bigapussy Bob the English teacher.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

On Sep 29, 1:48 pm, pigo wrote:
On Sep 29, 12:31 pm, lal_truckee wrote:

On 9/29/10 10:41 AM, snowbender wrote:

And your out burst changing the subject proves you are a little domain
knowledge. Yes, I've learned the phrase "joint someone's conversation"
from CNN.

No doubt that's how you heard the phrase, but what CNN says regularly is
"join the conversation." No "t"

Thanks for the correction; in our Chinese English, we do have
difficulty to distinguish the "end" sound, as we grew up in Chinese
"tunes," which one word has only one sound.

I'm pretty sure what you meant is "join."

You've interpreted it correctly.

Well that's what I was getting at. And one wouldn't have to hear it on
CNN. It's a pretty common phrase. And a basic understanding of English
would also tell someone that "join" is the proper use and context.
That "joint" either in the accepted version or the slang just doesn't
fit.

Ahh... still the misspelling thingy, very shrewd, very shrewd;
nevertheless, you know how to correct spelling, but don't how to
interpret the meaning of "a pretty common phrase"? Yup, that's in a
domain of little knowledge.

Oh well. What are you going to do when a polite questioning of it is
labled an "out burst" (I think it's outburst)?

So, it is "outburst," same thing; nevertheless, the way your outburst
changing the subject title intended to insult just like what Scott
did, and you think you are a better person than him? Where I come
from, we call you kind of person "shamelessly fake."

snowbender

On Sep 29, 11:45 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article
,

snowbender wrote:
Is there a BA in Tai Chi? Do you have a 4 year degree in it? If not,
then how can you claim to be proficient in it. Unless there's more to
mastery and excellence than a Liberal Arts curriculum with a few extra
math classes stuck in there.

Though Taichichuans are popular on the "streets," but the classical
Taichi literatures are mostly studied by college professors, that is,
post PhD research. Oops, just realized, I've really stretched you
gappers' little mental capacity too much, my bad. And you do need an
operational concept of "isomorphism" to really "study" Taichi Skiing.

You are ADORABLE!

Please tell me more about PhD level tai chi. Is it awarded at the
learning annex?

Not sure there's any PhD program specifically for Taichi, as true
Taichi is Unism, cannot be analysis/measured in western accreditation
sense.

And you never actually said if you had BA in tai ch, much less your PhD
in tai chi. I do know there's a course taught down at the park to
senior citizens. Did you get it there?

No, I didn't say I had BA in Taichi, and never did say there's PhD
program for Taichi, where did you get that idea? Kind of miss read to
confuse yourself, or is it prelude for your shameless bashing? I've
learned my Taichi through skiing.

As for "isomorphism" I can only assume that you have picked another word
you'd like to use however you feel like. I am totally gorlunked by your
inprivious snarfblatism regarding isomorphism.

Given that ms word spelling checker shown three spelling errors in
"gorlunked by your inprivious snarfblatism," (wonder what pigo would
do know,) you probably don't really know what "isomorphism" is, but
make up some irrelevant words to redirect the attention. You are just
a little knowledge pretend you know.

Basics are good for building a foundation, nevertheless, when the
techniques and skills advance, holding on the basics will be too
little and too slow. The real world is big, and is a jungle out there;
with your "fixed" domain English, you won't grow, and stuck.

Uh dude, I'm not the one who has been banned by most of the skiing
groups on the internet for netkookery.

Like you gappers declare winning and run? No, hiding in your foxholes
is much a winning but a cowardly retreat. Yup, a foxhole is a small
world.

Can you imagine if you were trying to discuss mathematics with someone
who believed that "" and "" were freely interchangeable with
parenthesis and who insisted that a "+" meant to multiply? Because
that's how you act here, with a lot of incoherent insults and name
calling too.

You have described yourself well; when the shoe fit, wear it, little
domain knowledge.

Ah the infamous Peewee Herman "no I'm not, you are" defense. You are
one of many netkooks to use this one.

By the way, calling me "little domain knowledge" is exactly the sort of
incoherent insults and name calling that I was referring to.

Given that you come to a skiing newsgroup, dare not to admit that you
a skier and bashing people who do, you are netkook, and that is
proven.

snowdender

Dave

On Sep 29, 11:17 am, Richard Henry wrote:
On Sep 29, 10:42 am, snowbender
wrote:
On Sep 29, 8:29 am, Richard Henry wrote:

On Sep 29, 8:04 am, snowbender
wrote: On Sep 28, 5:54 pm, "Bob F" wrote:

downhill wrote:
Yabahoobs wrote:
evel to understand it.
What was the topic of your PhD thesis?

If "his" math is the standard suite of collegiate courses (Calc
1,2,3,4, Linear Algebra, differentials, etc) then I think many of us
in here should be able to converse with him in depth about
mathetmatics, and perhaps even his doctoral thesis.

You need to know what "isomorphism" is before you even qualified.

Please continue.

So, what do you know about "isomorphism"?

snowbender

In mathematics, it is a term that can have subtly different meanings
depending on the application. A general definition, at the synonym
level, is bijective morphism, which descibes a relationship that has a
symmetric, but not necessarily identical operation in both directions
between two sets, groups or structures. That is sometimes described
as one-on-one and onto. A crude and elementary example is
relationship between the set of all integers i and the set of all even
integers 2i.

Does any of that apply to your thesis?

Well, at least you know the basic math theory correctly; nevertheless,
a little bit too complicated for the real world application, how does
it explain the phenomenon that a caterpillar changes into a butterfly?

snowbender

On Sep 29, 11:45 am, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article
,

snowbender wrote:
Is there a BA in Tai Chi? Do you have a 4 year degree in it? If not,
then how can you claim to be proficient in it. Unless there's more to
mastery and excellence than a Liberal Arts curriculum with a few extra
math classes stuck in there.

Though Taichichuans are popular on the "streets," but the classical
Taichi literatures are mostly studied by college professors, that is,
post PhD research. Oops, just realized, I've really stretched you
gappers' little mental capacity too much, my bad. And you do need an
operational concept of "isomorphism" to really "study" Taichi Skiing.

You are ADORABLE!

Please tell me more about PhD level tai chi. Is it awarded at the
learning annex?

Not sure there's any PhD program specifically for Taichi, as true
Taichi is Unism, cannot be analysis/measured in western college
accreditation sense.

And you never actually said if you had BA in tai ch, much less your PhD
in tai chi. I do know there's a course taught down at the park to
senior citizens. Did you get it there?

No, I didn't say I had BA in Taichi, and never did say there's PhD
program for Taichi, where did you get that idea? Kind of miss read to
confuse yourself, or it is prelude for your shameless bashing? I've
learned my Taichi through skiing, gravity, and mother nature.

As for "isomorphism" I can only assume that you have picked another word
you'd like to use however you feel like. I am totally gorlunked by your
inprivious snarfblatism regarding isomorphism.

Given that ms word spelling checker shown three spelling errors in
"gorlunked by your inprivious snarfblatism," (wonder what pigo would
do now,) you probably don't really know what "isomorphism" is, but
make up some irrelevant words to redirect the attention. You are just
a little knowledge pretending you know.

Basics are good for building a foundation, nevertheless, when the
techniques and skills advance, holding on the basics will be too
little and too slow. The real world is big, and is a jungle out there;
with your "fixed" domain English, you won't grow, and stuck.

Uh dude, I'm not the one who has been banned by most of the skiing
groups on the internet for netkookery.

Like you gappers declare winning and run? No, hiding back in your
foxholes is much a winning but a cowardly retreat. Yup, a foxhole is a
small world.

Can you imagine if you were trying to discuss mathematics with someone
who believed that "" and "" were freely interchangeable with
parenthesis and who insisted that a "+" meant to multiply? Because
that's how you act here, with a lot of incoherent insults and name
calling too.

You have described yourself well; when the shoe fit, wear it, little
domain knowledge.

Ah the infamous Peewee Herman "no I'm not, you are" defense. You are
one of many netkooks to use this one.

By the way, calling me "little domain knowledge" is exactly the sort of
incoherent insults and name calling that I was referring to.

Given that you come to a skiing newsgroup, dare not to admit that you
a skier and bashing people who do, you are a netkook, and that is
proven.

snowdender

Dave

On Sep 30, 7:26*am, snowbender
wrote:

So, it is "outburst," same thing; nevertheless, the way your outburst
changing the subject title intended to insult just like what Scott
did, and you think you are a better person than him? Where I come
from, we call you kind of person "shamelessly fake."

Not that I accept your premise. But show me where I "changing the
subject title".

On Sep 30, 7:34*am, snowbender
wrote:

Well, at least you know the basic math theory correctly; nevertheless,
a little bit too complicated for the real world application, how does
it explain the phenomenon that a caterpillar changes into a butterfly?

I learned that in animal studies, not math.

On Sep 30, 7:37*am, pigo wrote:
On Sep 30, 7:26*am, snowbender
wrote:



So, it is "outburst," same thing; nevertheless, the way your outburst
changing the subject title intended to insult just like what Scott
did, and you think you are a better person than him? Where I come
from, we call you kind of person "shamelessly fake."

Not that I accept your premise. But show me where I "changing the
subject title".

Bigapussy Bob, of course you don't accept the premise. You think
taking cheap shots while hiding behind your computer is manly.
But I certainly agree with the premise. In MY world, you are a truly
despicable, vile, dickless coward, a deranged stalker, and an all
around douchebag asshole, etc.
You own this ppppuuusssssy, Ichie.

On Sep 30, 6:34*am, snowbender
wrote:
On Sep 29, 11:17 am, Richard Henry wrote:



On Sep 29, 10:42 am, snowbender
wrote:
On Sep 29, 8:29 am, Richard Henry wrote:

On Sep 29, 8:04 am, snowbender
wrote: On Sep 28, 5:54 pm, "Bob F" wrote:

downhill wrote:
Yabahoobs wrote:
evel to understand it.
What was the topic of your PhD thesis?

If "his" math is the standard suite of collegiate courses (Calc
1,2,3,4, Linear Algebra, differentials, etc) then I think many of us
in here should be able to converse with him in depth about
mathetmatics, and perhaps even his doctoral thesis.

You need to know what "isomorphism" is before you even qualified.

Please continue.

So, what do you know about "isomorphism"?

snowbender

In mathematics, it is a term that can have subtly different meanings
depending on the application. *A general definition, at the synonym
level, is bijective morphism, which descibes a relationship that has a
symmetric, but not necessarily identical operation in both directions
between two sets, groups or structures. *That is sometimes described
as one-on-one and onto. *A crude and elementary example is
relationship between the set of all integers i and the set of all even
integers 2i.

Does any of that apply to your thesis?

Well, at least you know the basic math theory correctly; nevertheless,
a little bit too complicated for the real world application, how does
it explain the phenomenon that a caterpillar changes into a butterfly?

snowbender

No one expected any real math content to your response.

What was the title of your thesis? Is it available online?

On Sep 30, 7:37 am, pigo wrote:
On Sep 30, 7:26 am, snowbender
wrote:
So, it is "outburst," same thing; nevertheless, the way your outburst
changing the subject title intended to insult just like what Scott
did, and you think you are a better person than him? Where I come
from, we call you kind of person "shamelessly fake."

Not that I accept your premise. But show me where I "changing the
subject title".

Oops, it was lowdown downhill changed the subject title; sorry, my
bad. Nevertheless, thanks for being obsessed with my spelling.

snowbender