"Michael Davis" <mdavis19@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3341a0bea96adc448d0be02c45ab2a50@news.meganetnews.com...

Kavik Kang wrote:

It is in galactic terms, it's a close neighbor.

Irrelevant. Picking and choosing the distance yardstick you use
for comparison doesn't make the star any closer.

It's not picking and choosing, the galaxy is a lot bigger than 90 light
years, a lot bigger, and so 90 light years represents a small area

within

that space.

90 light years is not a "small" space by any human measure.
Especially not in light of the fact that no human has ever been
more than 250,000 miles away from home, and that even making the
4.3 light year trip to the nearest star is not only beyond our
abilities, but may remain so forever.

You are really going to make me explain the obvious at length, aren't you.
Ok... this tactic doesn't work long, once you realize I am always willing to
take the time to give a 2 paragraph answer to a 3 word answer question. Here
goes, Bucko...

"The galaxy is big. It's really big. I mean, you think it big, but it's even
bigger than that."  Oops, that's Hitchiker's Guide, haha. Obviously, as
anyone who wasn't playing games would know by now, I am saying that two
stars seperated by 90 light years in this galaxy are close too each other on
that galactic scale. Everyone reading this except you understands this
already, but let's make sure you finally have it. In this vast area, 90
light years is a tiny little dash, a speck really. Now, ever since you
Raving Lunatic Debunkers were forced to admit that there were planets
outside of this solar system, this silly "the must be a planet like Jupiter
at exactly the same distance for their too be life". Now, I understand the
THEORY behind that, but by no means is it the certainty you lunatics insist
that it is. So, now we have two such planets in a very small area of space
(by comparison, the galaxy is huge) and we really have very primitive
equipment too be even looking. We are basically looking through a straw for
this stuff.

So what is your response to exactly what you had been demanding being
found... This. Exactly this. We are in the midst of it right now, is
everyone paying attention?

So do you get it now? Let's make sure. First, 'human measure" is irrelivant
and has nothing to do with the question, nor does the distance any human has
been from Earth, nor the distance of the nearest star, nor the fact that
there is a remote chance that we may never reach the nearest star. You do,
however, obviously have a gift for confusing the issue with irrelivant
nonsense, that's the second time you've done that and we're just getting
started. All that does matter is that the galaxy is hundreds-of-thousands of
light years across, and 90 light years isn't much within that space. That
was the only point, and it was a simple one. The only reason that it took
this much explination too get here is because you are quite obviously a
Raving Lunatic Debunker and were trying too use this point as part of your
demented little game. Can we move on now?

Sometimes debunkers have problems with the most simple concepts.

Actually we just have problems with simple people like you.

You have no idea how accurate that statement is.

Actually, this is what I read in his post, clipped right from it:

"What's more, the new planet has a circular orbit like Jupiter,
sits a Jupiter-like distance from its star, HD70642, and has no
bigger planets between it and the star, just like Jupiter."

That seems to say it sit's a Jupiter-like distance from it's star, not

mars,

you know, exactly what you had been asking for...

Ok, If you want to just keep repeating the same erroneous claim
over and over again as if that will somehow make it true, then you
are clearly too stupid for me to bother wasting any more of my
time on you. Hint: Have you looked at any of the other press
releases on this discovery? No? Thought not. You may want to
before you further destroy whatever little credibility you may
think you have.

Repeating what? That was the first time I clipped that and showed it too
you. It's what we have been discussing all along. And no, I haven't, I am
here in this newsgroup, I'm not following every news outlet and keeping up
with every scientific jounral as your kind likes to constantly demand.
Apparently you believe you have told me something that you have never told
me, all you've done is rant and rave like a lunatic so far, and pick minor
issues too turn into major ones. Nothing new, really. And my credibility is
a little bit more well-established around here than you imagine... I
certainly don't have to worry about an aggressive, abusive, name calling
Raving Lunatic like you damaging it.

--- Flush remainder of clueless idiocy and empty bluster ---

You mean clip almost everything I wrote because you had no response.

Here's another hint son, you won't get far in the world by denying
that the largest man-made object on Earth exists. Buy, rent,
borrow or steal a clue.

I deny nothing, in fact, there is nobody with a more sincere desire to find
evidence for that wall. But there hasn't been any so far. You, apparently,
take it's existance on faith. There can be no other explination, since you
insist it exsists and yet are unwilling to provide any evidence for that
extraordinary claim.

Keep running, Bucko.