Keith, I reiterate that you just make up stuff about other people - it is a psychiatric delusion if you really think you have this "knowledge" about other people - it's purely a fabrication of your mind.
Another poster has his own definition of "science" and now you invent your own definition of "intellectual" and you wonder why you don't understand what others are saying?
Gnomoron, it is you that is claiming that I claim to have "knowledge" about other people. I clearly stated that I was merely giving my "opinion" of you. My opinion of you is based soley upon what you post here. Again, you try to put words in my mouth in a transparent attempt to divert the discussion away from things that you cannot intelligently and truthfully contradict. This is why I said I don't like your dishonesty.
Go back and read my post from last night. In the first line I said, "Gnomoron, I wasn't making up stuff about you. I was sarcastically giving my OPINION about you and nca225." Why are you trying to pull your usual bullshit with me. Are you too stupid to realize that I don't let you get away with it? Anyone who read the thread from last week that I cited knows your methodology. How many times have you been busted on this now? A hydrocephalic mongoloid would have learned and stopped repeating the same mistake by now, but not you. So are you stupid or dishonest? There really are no other choices.
craigd, you might be interested in this. I stated earlier that I took a couple of meterology courses at Pennsylvania State University as electives. The degree I received from Penn State is a Bachelor of Science in Biology. As you can imagine, I took a ton of courses in biology, biochemistry, and inorganic and organic chemistry. I spent many many hours in the lab classes associated with these. In organic chemistry, we learned about the reactions and processes involved in synthesizing organic compounds from plastics to pharmaceuticals to BIOCHEMICAL processes such as photosynthesis, hormone production, nucleic acid formation, RNA and DNA structure, etc., etc. So when Gnomoron says with his usual air of superiority, that there is no connection between "organic" and "synthesis" and "biochemistry", he is exhibiting collossal ignorance.
As stated, I spent a lot of time in student organic chemistry labs performing various experiments including synthesis of various organic compounds. Neither I, nor any of my many classmates ever experienced a problem with a conservation of matter conundrum where we had a theoretically impossible excessive yield. More often than not, the problem was reduced yield caused by process losses and repeated purifications or recrystalizations. Sometimes we'd barely get enough to verify our results by density, specific gravity, melting points, boiling points, IR or NMR spectroscopy, etc. Nor were we ever warned or told of such a possibility by our professors. I'm sure just the mere introduction of atmospheric gasses or moisture could alter expected yield, but in almost all cases, any additional yield would be too small to measure either by weight or volume. I'll repeat, it could happen, but Gnomoron is apparently trying to dazzle you with smoke and mirrors. So what is your opinion of Gnomoron, stupid or dishonest?
Lastly, in my first post in this thread, I mentioned my embarrassment at my Alma Mater's role in the falsification of climate data in the scandal at East Anglia University. The Libs here, and the liberal media pretty much ignored that to the extent that they could. The liberal media waited a short time until the scandal cooled down, then they went right back at it, spouting the Global Warming- Sky Is Falling mantra. They went right back to promoting extremely costly policies that are verifiably based upon dishonest data. The Libs here are cool with that. So what's the verdict... stupid or dishonest?
The big question in my mind is why did the liberal media keep Penn State in a very bright and vicious spotlight for so long over the Jerry Sandusky scandal, and virtually ignore another scandal at the same school that will help to disrupt all our lives and cost many trillions of dollars?
