Re: Lock picking to survive



"zatoichi" <zatoeechii@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e38aj6$f4r$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ah! The pure argumentum ad hominem attack. What makes this one special is that zat attacks me for being CORRECT, and is too dimwitted and ignorant to realize that he is attacking me for being correct.

1) Ad hominem (he had to dig back three years).
2) He was impressed with "authority" arguments.
3) He's completely and utterly WRONG, to boot.

Three time looser.

<snip >

> Is that the same dropout student of physics Stuart Grey

Yes. Dropped out, got an Engineering Degree (with Honors) and has gone back to finish that physics degree, thanks.

> who once claimed on rec.org.mensa

Silly me thought that the people on rec.org.mensa were smart. Intelligence is to the mind what absorbency is to a sponge, it indicates the rate at which knowledge or water can be acquired. The problem is, put the high absorbent sponge into sewage, and it fills with... sewage. Same with an high IQ mind immersed in illiberal pap.

> that A. Einstein regarded quantum theory as wrong,

He did. Your french bimbo math expert was utterly wrong. His "God does not play dice with the universe" rebuttal to quantum mechanics is legendary. Here's Proof.

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/quantum1.htm

Einstein could not accept this lack of certainty; and he raised one
objection after another. At the Solvay Conferences of 1927 and 1930 the
debate between Bohr and Einstein went on day and night, neither man
conceding defeat.

"Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us closer to the secret of the 'Old One.' I, at any rate, am convinced that He is not playing at dice."

By the mid 1930s, Einstein had accepted quantum mechanics as a consistent theory for the statistics of the behavior of atoms. He recognized that it was "the most successful physical theory of our time." This theory, which he had helped to create, could explain nearly all the physical phenomena of the everyday world. Eventually the applications would include transistors, lasers, a new chemistry, and more. Yet Einstein could not accept quantum mechanics as a completed theory, for its mathematics did not describe individual events. Einstein felt that a more basic theory, one that could
completely describe how each individual atom behaved, might yet be found.

> then called Rene Descartes a gibbering idiot,

Yes. His proof that all men have exactly the same intelligence was so stupid as to be laughable.

Do you agree with Descartes' conclusion?

He had other examples of really bad logic.

> claimed that math is not a science

It isn't. There are no experiments. Math can all be done in one's head.
Since no experiments or observations are necessary, it is not a science.

So far, you're wrong three times out of three.

> and that French are lousy scientists,

Yes. I have low opinions of the french.

> the same one who forgot that he never really understood general
> relativity

Humm. So, here I admit that I've not yet mastered GR... I have no problem saying so. What's your problem?

> and -*Oh the horror of it*- confused it for chick-impressing special
> relativity, and finally got bitchslapped to Bangkok by French woman
> mathematician who didn't want to recognize his greatness didn't need
> published scientific work or PhD to consider himself above others?

The stupid bitch argued from authority and was just being contrary. Her
chief argument was that Einstein was lousy in the lab, and didn't do lab
work. Her argument of this was that she was ignorant, and it was up to me to get her to admit she was wrong. Einstein worked hard in the lab...

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/ae7.htm
The Physics Institute of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich.
"I worked most of the time in the physics laboratory," Einstein recalled, "fascinated by the direct contact with experience."

There is also some evidence that Einstein had repeated the photo electric effect experiment in the Swiss Patent office lab to greater precision than had previously been done. Critics of his paper on the photo electric effect were struck by his magical ability to divine the relationship from the up to then published data. Later on, Millikan, in an effort to show that Einstein's couldn't be right, recreated the photo electric effect and verified that Einstein had indeed the correct data, and Millikan won the nobel prize for confirming Einstein's prediction with more advanced experiments.

So, the frog bimbo was utterly and complete full of herself and wrong. Since you are a weak minded ignorant troll, you were totally taken with her appeals to authority; "I work with a nuclear physicist". Oh, please! That is as stupid an argument for a historical fact as stupid arguments get.

> Because if he is, no acknowledgment of an error may come from man so
> bitter.

And yet, I admitted I wasn't a master of GR. You seem to be wrong again.

> When exactly did self-aggrandizement become a wisdom and arrogance
> knowledge? Don't really know what would be the right thing to do in
> EOTWAWKI; to shoot him or run away from such a man.

I'd probably eat you, as I tend to with lower life forms, like rabbits and squirrels, so you'd better run. :-D
.