> cheesetray wrote:
> are there any true gentlemen in here who would like to engage in
some private intelligent intercourse, you just have to start, and i
can contribute with my sharp perspicacity and questioning and/or
additions, all of which are equally stimulating, i have discovered
from the responses of those sharing their higher knowledge with me.
university professors, psychologists, high-priced lawyers, many
scientists (this last one i think in fact of written materials online,
including from MIT and johns hopkins, and i could have written
letters....DESTROYING THEM, but i was too lazy, i didn't care that
much, most of it was due to a higher understanding of semantics and
the construction of english, and how to write, although in cases of
subjects with which i am not familiar, i didn't even know what the
hell was being proposed it was that poorly/illogically written, thus i
would not have been able to provide/suggest proper alternatives)...and
in some cases...even when the topic was outside of my ken but such
that i could contribute with the things i have mentioned, i have
discovered that my intelligence was much higher than my more highly
educated partners for discussion.....sadly......

if you're
wondering (not anybody w/superior IQs of course) but just to be
friendly, about how i could *know* it was illogical, as opposed to a
deficiency on MY part in comprehension, i *think* (not 100% sure, but
based on what i know) the best way to describe it is, it wasn't
mathematically sound? i could tear it apart, logically. and it was NOT
an issue of definition, i promise.

you know, cuz you could say, well, sometimes words have two meanings,
(or many more, including opposite), but you'll just have to take my
word for it, that was NOT the issue.

This is a response to the post seen at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=672653206#672653206