On Wed, 25 May 2005 12:29:24 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:

Education. One that eludes you. I find it amusing you are always
astonished at exactly "how" and "why" people know things you do not.
This can partially be attributed to your narcism and refusal to accept
anyone knows more than you.

And for the record, I never denied global
warming,


You did.

Not. Post any quote of mine where I said any such thing. You really do
have a reading comprehension problem.

just questioned the amount of effect that
humanity has truly had on it.

Yes, after you initially denied it.

I never denied it.


The evidence is still inconclusive on this point,
as I have provided in the links.



No, the evidence is most certainly conclusive, as my links were dated of
last week.

Which is meaningless, as new evidence is always being obtained. There
has been no definitive decision made with regard to man's affect on
global warming, as there are too many unexplained variable. The
antarctic ice pack increasing as the arctic ice pack melts is but one
example.


Once again, because you are unable to grasp the methods in
which concentrations of certain gases can ascertain and pinpoint with
extreme accuracy what is manmade and what is naturally occurring and
released into the atmosphere, does not make it any less so.

Gas is gas, there is no way to determine where it all came from once
it is all mixed into a large swirl.


Ah, so you've decided to print the information
without my permission eh? I knew you couldn't
resist the urge.

I don't need your permission to ask what is in the public domain.

The why did you ask in the first place?

I asked for your explicit and implied permission to post related
information. Do I have it?

Why ask, you claimed to not need permission. Why do you insist in
talking in circles?


BTW, you need to either upgrade or trash your
"Spy" software (Or ask for a refund of that
$9.95).


Keep guessing all that you will never know.

As you seem to, like my wife's name.

_
Yet, you brokke FCC law by not providing it to the FCC.

Are you retarded, or can you simply not read?
You are mistaken about my current address.


When you take to lying about your wife and everything else you have lied
about in the past, nothig you can say can ever regain a reputation for
credibility. You destroyed any you had long ago.

What you think is irrelevant. Anyone else would clearly see that my
old address matches the 1993 QRZ database, and could easily determine
that I changed my address when I moved as required. But you are trying
to insist that my old address is my current address and accuse me of
not changing it (back) in the FCC database. You may have some skills
at cyber stalking but you clearly cannot comprehend what you find.


.Your "Cyber detective" software is out of date.

I have no software,,,besides,,webtv doesn't use software. Off you go,
now,,,

No, it's web-based, for a fee.


My current address IS the one on my FCC
license. The one you have is the OLD one.
Stony creek road was were I was born and
raised and spent most of my CB career. I
.moved from there in 1999.

You can verify this by going on QRZ and
loading the 1993 version of the callbook, and
then look at what address my call is listed
with.

I accept (once again) your apology. No one claimed the Stony Creek was
your curretn address, Davie.

That exactly what you claimed when you accused me of having an
incorrect address on my FCC license. Backpedal all that you want, but
I hope the crow tastes good.

I now have you in such a freakin' tizzy, you are
denying your own wife's name when it has been confirmed and you are
scrambling to explain awwy everything I posted.

How has it been confirmed?


Ahhh,,,,,I prefer to remain content in wacthing you self-tighten that
noose. The squirming you share with us is good for a bit longer.

I other words, you're lying (again).


Because YOU think it is? I am telling you, you
are dead wrong about my wife's name.



I know exactly what you say, but the fact is her exact name appeared on
the change of address card submitted to the Post Office with the same
address shared by you,,there. That's another small bit of information
you were ignornat of..when one places a change of address card wioth the
Post Office, if you fail to check the little box at the bottom that
tells of your privacy, they SELL the information to listbrokers. Now,
tell us how the Post Office gt it wrong, Dave...LMFAO!

No, your cyber spy site got it wrong. They've mixed up people with a
common last name. It wouldn't be the first time.


_
In fact, she
used to reside on Gravers Road, but you go on denying she is your wife
because of the shame you rained down upon yourself.

Well, unless you know her maiden name, you can't trace her roots
before we were married, and I never lived on "Graver's road", like I
said, I never even heard of it.

I never even heard of Gravers road.

Really? You grew up near there and never heard of it? Need the exact
address on Gravers Road and then you can use the mapblast, eh?
Ok,,she was born in 1963 and lived at 1819 Gravers Road in Norristown.

Oh, this is just too easy.....

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp...te=PA&zipcode=


There is no such address in the mapquest database, as the link shows.
Once again, you're wrong, and I proved it.


(We must be up to a
dozen things you've been wrong about now).


Cripes...this talk from you sounds just like it did when it was shown
you lied about having a Phelps Stationmaster antenna.

How was that shown? You have nothing but your own misguided opinion.


This is what happens when you play with
cyperspy wannabe software for $9.95.


Does that type software give that information? How about birthdates and
applications for marriage on file with the state,,,including addresses?

Sure, for a fee. I find it funny that you spent money to try find out
my personal information. Most of which was either outdated or just
plain wrong. Yet you hypocritically accuse ME of seeking your personal
information. I have not posted one bit of information about you. Quite
frankly, I don't really care. You are just a newsgroup distraction,
the Jar-Jar Binks of rec.radio.cb.

_
It's not what I think, it's what more and more
regs are conveying to you on a regualr basis.

Name them.


Well, sure,,,Frank taugh you better regarding radio technical
competency,

Frank has some issues as well. He failed to recognize common industry
terms, and discredited my explanations of common electronic circuits
because they didn't fit within his own narrow "education".

you called him names and took issue with his career.

I was he who first started to degrade my education and career. I only
kept the same level of civility.



Shark taught you better regarding your own state's driving laws,

Shark basically helped me prove my point that you are basically guilty
until you prove your innocence in traffic court. He thought perhaps,
that he was countering what he thought was my contention that you
couldn't beat a traffic ticket. But by illustrating the effort that he
went through to beat his traffic ticket, he proved my point that you
can win, but you have to prove your innocence.

He also tried to counter that the law in my state is that in most
cases, the cops have to give you at least 5 MPH tolerance before
citing you. When I provided the exact statute that spelled this out,
his argument then became that "a cop can write anything he wants",
which, when placed against the context of his prowess at fighting
tickets, should have clued him in to the fruitless nature of writing a
ticket that would immediately get kicked out when someone slaps a copy
of pa statute 3368 into evidence.


and he was
attacked by "Geo" all of a sudden with homo remarks,,BTW, where is "Geo"
these days? : )

I wouldn't know. But I thought "George" was now actually "Chris".
Besides, he's busy yanking Steveo's chain. And you can thank Frank for
digging up the transsexual stuff that gets thrown at Shark.


Our British friend across the pond taught you about cb radios that come
type accepted with what are legal roger beeps, but you denied that as
well, screamed and begged for proof, was given it, and humbled.

Yea well, first off, it was Bert Craig who set me straight. And
considering that I've been here posting for close to 10 years now, I'm
bound to get a few things wrong. No one is perfect. If the best you
can come up with is 2 mistakes that I made in 10 years worth of
posting, I'd say that's a pretty good percentage.


Jim
tried talking to you about foreign news sources, and you called him
naive.

If someone truly thinks that a foreign news service is any less likely
to be affected by political bias, then they are naive.

No Davie,,as is always the pattern, you blame everyone else when
the problem is yourself.

That's why you spent money to find out my information. You are fixated
and obsessed with me.


_
Google hypocrite and your name, and you will find those who taught you
better.

You mean those hypocrites who hypocritically call other people
hypocrites?


.Nice dodge.

But I drive a Ford.


A blue one whose license plates do not match the address given to the
FCC as provided by law.

No, actually the color is teal, but it shows up more blue in pictures.
Pictures that anyone can freely see on my web site. But there are no
license plates showing on my truck, so you're lying again.

Tell you what, since you can't figure out a simple problem of
determining which of my two addresses is my correct one, why don't you
call the FCC and complain. I'm sure they will get right to the bottom
of the issue.



and contrary to your wild imagination, you do
not represent the majority.

Contrary to your claims that have been corrected by the majority of the
regs, it is yourself that is of the most radical, hypocritical, and of a
minority position that is usually incorrect.

Three people do not a majority make. And you don't count since your
mental faculties are out of sync with reality. So that leaves 2 1/2.


Other that you, Frank, and

occasionally Landshark, who actually even
gives enough of a crap about these jabs that
we exchange, to even chime in?

You are again under the mistaken and erroneous belief one must "chime
in" to all exchanges in order to express they care?

Well gee, how then are we supposed to know
that they disagree?


Care is not a "simile" for "disagree". When you figure that out, you may
ask such questions.

Your word games and semantic shuffle will not allow you to wiggle out
of that so easily. If one does not post their opinions, how do we know
what they think on any topic?


Did you buy Frank's crystal ball?

Dude, you are so far out, you can never regain composure.

I'm not the one who's suggesting that I can
read minds in order to glean the opinions of
people who do not post their opinions here.

You invoked your schooling of your own free will. This is where your
**** poor communication skill comes in to play. When one enters a topic
in to a conversation, be prepared to substantiate it.

.Just like you gave us the names and
addresses of all of your publishing gigs when
you once claimed to be a "professional
journalist"?



Exactly. I provided where I went to school and for who I was employed.

Yes, and I could claim to be George W. Bush. Doesn't make it the truth
though. You are too paranoid to provide verifiable information. I
truly believe that if someone ever "outs" you and posts your name
address and other personal info, that you'd self destruct.

That horrible **** poor memory you have is partially responsible for
your communication deficits.

Sorry, but unlike you, who life's mission seems to be a fixation on
every post I've ever made (Many of which you still got wrong), I don't
remember the content of 3 year old posts. You are just not that
important.


Your personal
obsessive mania concerning my personal life

Yet it is you who is obsessively begging for personal info about me.

Who's begging? I simply illustrate your hypocrisy when you demand
verifiable personal information, but refuse to give any of yourself.



C'mon, you can do better.


When you take to providing a contingent of explanations, it reiterates
my perfect aim and accuracy.

My explanations only serve to illustrate, to the casual observer,
just how off the wall you are. Most other people do not share your
comprehension disability.

Dave
"Sandbagger"