Discussion:
Belief - I'd like to share this item with you.
Add Reply
David B.
2024-02-25 11:26:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"



The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.

No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!

If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.

Sincerely,
--
David
T i m
2024-02-25 12:17:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
Isn't cognitive bias a wonderful thing.
Post by David B.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
I'm not sure I ever thought about what any one person thought about such
things, let alone Darwins *Theory*.

However, you believe whatever best fits your cognitive bias. And it
doesn't actually matter what Darwin suggested (to you), all that matters
(to you) is that you can better *believe* it was all done by your
magical bearded cloud goD.
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation,
I took about 60 seconds and that was enough, thanks.
Post by David B.
I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
That you are still a nutter!
Post by David B.
Sincerely,
Yes, sincerely. ;-)

Cheers, T i m
J. J. Lodder
2024-02-25 18:18:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
David B. <***@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]

They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,

Jan
David
2025-02-24 11:36:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Thank you, Jan :-)

(Please don't mess with selected newsgroups though)
Bob Casanova
2025-02-25 00:13:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by David
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Thank you, Jan :-)
(Please don't mess with selected newsgroups though)
Thanks a bunch, Jan. :-(
--
Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov
Kerr-Mudd, John
2025-02-25 09:10:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
David
2025-02-25 10:53:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
He did!

Watch here (pun intended!)

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
"Perps & Rubes" sounds like it could be a reference to "perpetrators"
(perps) and "rubes" (naïve or easily deceived individuals). It could be
used in the context of a story, situation, or slang involving tricksters
and their victims. Were you referring to a specific context or phrase?
Let me know if you meant something else!
Kerr-Mudd, John
2025-02-25 14:14:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:53:40 +0000
Post by David
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
He did!
Watch here (pun intended!) http://youtu.be/3UsyZM0w8WM
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
I was just summarising.
Post by David
"Perps & Rubes" sounds like it could be a reference to "perpetrators"
(perps) and "rubes" (naïve or easily deceived individuals). It could be
used in the context of a story, situation, or slang involving tricksters
and their victims. Were you referring to a specific context or phrase?
Let me know if you meant something else!
Is this an AI bot?
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
David
2025-02-25 19:56:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:53:40 +0000
Post by David
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
He did!
Watch here (pun intended!) http://youtu.be/3UsyZM0w8WM
*DID you watch*?
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by David
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
I was just summarising.
OK. It wasn't clear to me.
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by David
"Perps & Rubes" sounds like it could be a reference to "perpetrators"
(perps) and "rubes" (naïve or easily deceived individuals). It could be
used in the context of a story, situation, or slang involving tricksters
and their victims. Were you referring to a specific context or phrase?
Let me know if you meant something else!
Is this an AI bot?
It was from ChatGPT - an excellent resource - now working in conjunction
with Apple. https://www.apple.com/uk/apple-intelligence/
Bob Casanova
2025-02-25 16:40:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 14:14:52 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "Kerr-Mudd, John"
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:53:40 +0000
Post by David
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
He did!
Watch here (pun intended!) http://youtu.be/3UsyZM0w8WM
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
I was just summarising.
Post by David
"Perps & Rubes" sounds like it could be a reference to "perpetrators"
(perps) and "rubes" (naïve or easily deceived individuals). It could be
used in the context of a story, situation, or slang involving tricksters
and their victims. Were you referring to a specific context or phrase?
Let me know if you meant something else!
Is this an AI bot?
Unless a new bot self-identifies as David Dalton (admittedly
not beyond possibility, self-identification being the "new
thing"), that would be a "no".
--
Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov
FromTheRafters
2025-02-25 21:52:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:53:40 +0000
Post by David
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
He did!
Watch here (pun intended!) http://youtu.be/3UsyZM0w8WM
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be
really interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and
heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
I was just summarising.
Post by David
"Perps & Rubes" sounds like it could be a reference to "perpetrators"
(perps) and "rubes" (naïve or easily deceived individuals). It could be
used in the context of a story, situation, or slang involving tricksters
and their victims. Were you referring to a specific context or phrase?
Let me know if you meant something else!
Is this an AI bot?
Ah, you recognized the accent. :)
David
2025-02-25 22:53:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Ah, you recognized the accent. 🙂
//That’s a fantastic car to have driven — FromTheRafters must have
turned a lot of heads with it! Classic muscle with a touch of luxury.
Did he ever share any stories about cruising around in it?//

Do tell! ;-)
--
David
RonO
2025-02-25 14:21:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
Denton claims that creationists like Behe and Phillip Johnson
misinterpreted his first book as being anti-evolution. Johnson may have
misinterpreted the first book, but Behe has pretty much always used the
stupidity to only fool the rubes into thinking that Denton's arguments
were anti-evolution. Behe has enough on the ball to understand that
biological evolution is a fact of nature, and has used the obfuscation
and denial to mix up the rube's understanding of the difference between
biological evolution and the "Darwinism" that Behe claims to have issues
with.

The example that likely most exemplifies the Beheian stupidity is what
he did to the IDiotic whale fossil gap argument that Sternberg had been
working on for over 7 years at the Discovery Institute. All those years
of effort were destroyed when Behe came up with his devolution
stupidity. Behe pointed out that evolution by breaking genes and making
them non functional was a common occurrence in producing something that
could be selected for if it occurred in an environment that would favor
such a deleterious mutation. There is no doubt that gene loss has
occurred among extant lineages for billions of years, but all extant
lineages have survived that loss of genes and have evolved into what
they are today.

Behe pointed out the obvious that if such a gene loss had selective
advantage in the existing environment that such events would be selected
for as they likely had for billions of years. It is difficult to
believe, but Behe's whale argument was that whales were an example of
Darwinian evolution that would have been expected to have selected for
all the genes that whales lost as they adapted to an aquatic
environment. As crazy as it was Behe claimed that whales had evolved
without designer intervention because Behe's designer would not have
designed whales the way in which they had actually evolved. He really
claimed that the type of evolution that had created whales was the type
of evolution expected to be due to Darwinian mechanism. Years of
dishonest whale fossil gap effort by Sternberg were flushed down the
toilet with one stupid article.

When first confronted by the Beheian stupidity Nyikos and Glenn, at
first, tried to deny what Behe had written, but there could be no
misinterpretation. Behe specifically stated that evolution by breaking
things would be expected to be selected for if they adapted an organism
to their environment, and that Darwininan mechanisms would be expected
to exploit such changes. He pointed out all the genes that had been
lost, and claimed that what had occurred was not evolution, but
devolution. Nyikos eventually accepted that Behe was claiming that
whales had evolved by natural mechanisms, but that it was a bad type of
evolution. No matter if what created whales was evolution or
devolution, whales still evolved by natural mechanisms. Glenn is likely
still in denial.

Behe understands that life on earth is the result of biological
evolution. He just wants his designer to be responsible for some of
that evolution (his favorite example is the bacterial flagellum).
Denton also accepts that biological evolution is a fact of nature, but
he no longer cares if his designer had anything to do with it except in
creating a universe where biological evolution could happen.

Ron Okimoto
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
Bob Casanova
2025-02-25 16:37:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 09:10:38 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<***@127.0.0.1>:

A correction: I wrote nothing of the below content.
Just sayin'...
Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:13:05 -0700
Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:36:09 +0000, the following appeared
Post by J. J. Lodder
[talk.origins added]
Post by David B.
"Secrets of the Cell with Michael Behe"
http://youtu.be/gw94qm4qdn8
The video is about half an hour long. I found the content absolutely
fascinating.
No longer do I believe in Darwin's Theory of Evolution!
Darwin was a Bad Boy who messed up Paley's watch.
Post by Bob Casanova
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good for you!
Post by David B.
If you take the time out to watch this video presentation, I'd be really
interested to learn what YOU think about what you've seen and heard.
May I point you to to the newsgroup talk.origins ?
They are badly in need of fresh creationists there.
[Fto: set]
They'll gladly tell you there what they think of Michael Behe,
Perps & Rubes.
--
Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov
dgb (David)
2024-03-12 13:27:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 25 Feb 2024 at 18:52:30 GMT, "erik simpson"
For the record, I think
Behe is pretty close to being a crank.
What evidence do you have for reaching such a conclusion, Erik?
TIA
Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute says all you need to know.
I've not heard of the organisation before. I've read here:-
https://www.discovery.org/about/
What do you feel is contentious?
The focus on Intellligent Design (ID). This has been kicked around on
this group for many years, and has its proponents. Obviously, I'm not
one of them. I don't propose to re-argue this subject. Check through
prior discussions here if you want to get the flavor of it. I'm not
interested in getting involved in such a discussion.
OK. Thanks, Erik.
If you can point me to any specific past discussion, it will be much
appreciated.
I've deleted all but this year's discussions. Go to Google Groups and you
can see everything except the most recent posts. Posts by Peter Nyikos and
the responses to his posts will discover the hottest discussions.
Does GG still archive NNTP articles?
Yes. Why come here to ask, Ray?
*BUMP*!
FromTheRafters
2024-03-12 14:59:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dgb (David)
On 25 Feb 2024 at 23:04:07 GMT, "erik simpson"
On 25 Feb 2024 at 18:52:30 GMT, "erik simpson"
For the record, I think
Behe is pretty close to being a crank.
What evidence do you have for reaching such a conclusion, Erik?
TIA
Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute says all you need to know.
I've not heard of the organisation before. I've read here:-
https://www.discovery.org/about/
What do you feel is contentious?
The focus on Intellligent Design (ID). This has been kicked around on
this group for many years, and has its proponents. Obviously, I'm not
one of them. I don't propose to re-argue this subject. Check through
prior discussions here if you want to get the flavor of it. I'm not
interested in getting involved in such a discussion.
OK. Thanks, Erik.
If you can point me to any specific past discussion, it will be much
appreciated.
I've deleted all but this year's discussions. Go to Google Groups and you
can see everything except the most recent posts. Posts by Peter Nyikos
and the responses to his posts will discover the hottest discussions.
Does GG still archive NNTP articles?
Yes. Why come here to ask, Ray?
*BUMP*!
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
dgb (David)
2024-03-12 15:12:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FromTheRafters
Post by dgb (David)
On 25 Feb 2024 at 23:04:07 GMT, "erik simpson"
On 25 Feb 2024 at 18:52:30 GMT, "erik simpson"
For the record, I think
Behe is pretty close to being a crank.
What evidence do you have for reaching such a conclusion, Erik?
TIA
Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute says all you need to know.
I've not heard of the organisation before. I've read here:-
https://www.discovery.org/about/
What do you feel is contentious?
The focus on Intellligent Design (ID). This has been kicked around on
this group for many years, and has its proponents. Obviously, I'm not
one of them. I don't propose to re-argue this subject. Check through
prior discussions here if you want to get the flavor of it. I'm not
interested in getting involved in such a discussion.
OK. Thanks, Erik.
If you can point me to any specific past discussion, it will be much
appreciated.
I've deleted all but this year's discussions. Go to Google Groups and you
can see everything except the most recent posts. Posts by Peter Nyikos
and the responses to his posts will discover the hottest discussions.
Does GG still archive NNTP articles?
Yes. Why come here to ask, Ray?
*BUMP*!
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
The answer is *NO* ........ but you didn't answer my question!

Whilst checking, I happened across this old item:-

=

As a reward for 'all of you from across the pond' coming here to this
group, here's a clip of an old Devon resident from a village close to my
home. I thought it amusing, but please tell us what *you* think!
Enjoy!



--
Dave
Steve Carroll
2024-03-12 15:51:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FromTheRafters
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
The message appearing in Chrome:

"Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions.
Historical content remains viewable."


I'm not counting on that second sentence to be true forever (and maybe
it won't be for very long).
dgb (David)
2024-03-12 16:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Carroll
Post by FromTheRafters
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
"Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions.
Historical content remains viewable."
Correct.
Post by Steve Carroll
I'm not counting on that second sentence to be true forever (and maybe
it won't be for very long).
I suspect you are dead right about that! We can monitor this one!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.politics.scorched-earth/c/yjm3Jq9-SD4
Steve Carroll
2024-03-12 16:24:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dgb (David)
Post by Steve Carroll
Post by FromTheRafters
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
"Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions.
Historical content remains viewable."
Correct.
Post by Steve Carroll
I'm not counting on that second sentence to be true forever (and maybe
it won't be for very long).
I suspect you are dead right about that! We can monitor this one!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.politics.scorched-earth/c/yjm3Jq9-SD4
So what are the issues with Blocknews? ES no longer carries much in the
way of retention, especially from ACW (thanks, Glasshole!) As much as I
don't want to pay for usenet access, if I want older content it seems I
no longer have a choice (apparently BN has one of the longest retention
rates).
dgb (David)
2024-03-12 16:36:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Carroll
Post by dgb (David)
Post by Steve Carroll
Post by FromTheRafters
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
"Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions.
Historical content remains viewable."
Correct.
Post by Steve Carroll
I'm not counting on that second sentence to be true forever (and maybe
it won't be for very long).
I suspect you are dead right about that! We can monitor this one!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.politics.scorched-earth/c/yjm3Jq9-SD4
So what are the issues with Blocknews? ES no longer carries much in the
way of retention, especially from ACW (thanks, Glasshole!) As much as I
don't want to pay for usenet access, if I want older content it seems I
no longer have a choice (apparently BN has one of the longest retention
rates).
I've had little problem with BlockNews. They are as 'Cheap as chips' too.
Snit
2024-03-12 21:36:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Carroll
Post by FromTheRafters
What I meant was, does Google 'continue' to archive NNTP articles
considering that they no longer peer.
"Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions.
Historical content remains viewable."
I'm not counting on that second sentence to be true forever (and maybe
it won't be for very long).
I love that Google killed your flood bot.

You have been more worked up than your norm since you found out.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
Loading...