Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"....a title con, again.
Yasha Hartberg (Yasha@bigraf.tamu.edu)
Thu, 18 May 1995 21:50:51 +0300
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com (John
> In article <5lqJhbTzcsB@khms.westfalen.de>, Kai Henningsen
> >If, on the other hand (as is, I'd argue, the only proper way), you begin
> >such a hypothetical examination by saying "these are the phenomenons
> *PHENOMENA* please.
> That is not just sloppy typing, which I am as guilty of
> as evryone else, it is a lack of understanding of the history of
> your own language.
> Anyone want two memorandas?
Tut, tut. Let's not get nasty. You may notice that Kai is posting from
Germany. I think it is reasonable to assume that English might not be his
first language. Given that and the fact that his English is usually
superb (note that he uses "phenomena" correctly several times above), he
can certainly be forgiven a slip of the tongue now and again. Besides,
grammar flames are just silly.
> My main point, sir, is I read this post expecting a little
> sci., instead, I heaved a little sigh.
> (Wow, am I funny)
> (That was sarcasm, at my own expense.)
> Please try to keep "god" things to the aberrant psychology
> newsgroups, like alt.madasa.banana and rec.mind.slowly, and off of
> the ones with sci in their titles.
> Thank you. John.
But I am reading this from alt.folklore.science where the rules are a bit
looser. I don't know who originally cross-posted this thread, but I must
say it has become interesting from time to time. It really is hopeless to
stop all the cross-posting now since there are, I believe, representative
participants from each of the groups.
Texas A&M University
"The most beautiful thing in Tokyo is McDonald's." Andy Warhol