It's fair to say that we got off on the wrong foot here. Let's see if we can do a little damage control.
This started when I responded to your assertion that "Bjorkman had refuted Bazant". And then used Bjorkman's own self-serving assessment of the match to describe Bazant's dissection of Bjorkman's idiocy as "the most shameful Closure in … history". While attributing that brainless quote to one of "Bazant's peers".
All the above is wonderful farce. And I think I've thought of a way for you to appreciate it.
Imagine that Bazant (with all his credentials) was your guy (contradicting NIST) & Bjorkman (with his zero credentials) was mine (supporting NIST). Yeah, I know. My skin crawls at first thought at least as much as yours does. But go with me here…
Next, imagine that I, with zero mechanical engineering knowledge, was citing Bjorkman's defense of NIST, & you, with ~40 years mech engineering experience, was championing Bazant's dissection of NIST.
Now, with all the above fantasy in place, re-read your post #17 (as though I wrote it) & my reply #56 (as though you wrote it). With a good imagination, you might be able to appreciate some dry humor in "your post #56". With a great imagination, & if you got high, the dry humor might even rise to the level of "wit".
A classic case of: "If he plays for the other team, he's 'dirty'. If he plays for our team, he's 'scrappy'.!"
Now, with the road back to amity & bonhomie repaved, perhaps I could get you to actually answer a few points.
Because, thus far, I've tried "dry humor". (#56)
I've tried sarcasm & pedantry. (#61) (You must admit, I give good pedantry!)
I've tried sincerity. (#65)
I've tried rebuke (#74)
I've tried blunt dissection (#89)
I've even tried twirling my mustache and talking in a funny, Canadian voice (also #89)
And, while you will go to the effort of posting cartoon characters, you will not produce a single serious answer to any of my serious arguments.
Why, it's almost as if you didn't want to learn where your assertions fall apart…?!! Say it ain't so.
(Pssst, OC. Just between you & me. Wanna know a really juicy bit of irony? Your post, that started this whole thing, to zappaman was indignantly - one might say "accusatorially" - entitled "As I expected, you have no answers."
"… no answers…" It's rare to get that level of sweet, sweet irony from amateur prose.)
So, OC, what are you going to do?
What are you going to do?
What do I have to do to get you to provide a simple straight answer to a simple straight question?
Are you going to FORCE ME to tie Little Nell to the train tracks again..???!
I will, you know..!!
You say "you give my opinion absolutely no value". LoL, I expect nothing else. I have zero expectation that you'll ever give my opinions any weight. After all, I'm an experienced mech engineer & the subject is "mechanical engineering". Being a Truther, OF COURSE you're never going to give my opinion any weight.
You seem confused on the concept.
You said something brain-dead stoopid ("Bjorkman refuted Bazant"
. I showed everyone how stoopid that statement was.
Ever since, I've been giving you the opportunity to address the issue & acknowledge your stoopid. Perhaps, to even act like an adult & admit that you were wrong.
You have resolutely demonstrated absolute CLASSIC Twoofiness: you've refused to address issues, you've gotten your panties in a bunch, you've stormed out of the room because "tfk's a big meanie!", and you've run off elsewhere, claiming victory "because tfk thinks Bazant's a God."
Oh, yeah. Almost forgot...
You posted a cartoon as though it was meaningful. (I always liked that one.!)
Have I got our interaction fairly well summarized?
Everything is exactly as it should be, OC.
You say stupid Truther things.
I'll show to the rest of the readers that they're stupid.
The universe is in order.
Ooops, looks like a little pothole has opened up on the Amityville Turnpike...
___
"Bwaahh, haaa, haaa…!
You MUST pay the rent...!!"
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read