Re: ZERO (was: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory"

Gil Hardwick (
Sat, 20 May 1995 01:41:27 GMT

In article <Admin.0zce@oubliette.COM>, Eric Shook (Panopticon@oubliette.COM) writes:
>Finally someone else has posted to this ridiculous argument, seeking
>to _re_solve_ what should be obvious. I have never been very good at
>stating the obvious. It is my greatest short-coming. It makes it
>hell to dump well known information out onto the test paper for a brief
>essay. I mean, why should I simply be repeating stuff that the professor
>just told all of us in the last few weeks, we all heard it didn't we?
>I'm always caught trying to integrate the information in new ways,
>expressing what was implied by the information, or what consequences
>of impact it might have upon other information that we covered. I'm
>greatly disadvantaged when it comes to stating the obvious.

Eric, it does not matter one jot whether you are good at stating the
obvious or not, especially here.

Whatever you write, the primates in the peanut gallery are going to
stamp and screech at you whatever you do. So what makes the thread so
ridiculous as such?

The whole thing is ridiculous. So ridiculous even the physicists have
found themselves stumped by it.

In the meantime, GREAT PROSE! Love it! Keep up the good work.