"Pete Charest" <BigDog@SharpTeeth.com> wrote in message
news:sunfhvc36mnk4eec630s5580ol3l62ru94@4ax.com...

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:27:05 GMT, "Kavik Kang"
<Kavik_Kang@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Pete Charest" <BigDog@SharpTeeth.com> wrote in message
news:jheehv8h36o4tge8kcdh5dtaj42nf4ql8f@4ax.com...

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:22:57 GMT, "Kavik Kang"
<Kavik_Kang@hotmail.com> wrote:

Sagan was just wrong. There is no such thing as
"extraordinary evidence" just as there is no such thing as

"extraordinary

proof".

Here is where the profoundly stupid Kavik KangarooFucker Kang claims
that Carl Sagan was just wrong.

That's right, I do. I stand by the original statement, pasted below, too
which this thread is primarily a response.

You meant *to which*, but you misspelled it. Carl Sagan would not have
misspelled such a trivial and often-used phrase.

Actually, he might have, since spelling and grammar have no bearing at all
on intelligence and reasoning. You had made claim actually, that they did, I
wonder if you ever presented all that evidence I had asked for... or if you
have proven that you are truely a kook. If you've provided no evidence you
are, by your kind's own definition, a kook. Haven't got to that post, I
can't wait:-)

There is no such thing as "extraodrinary evidence". There is evidence

and

there is conjecture. No claim requires a higher level of "proof" than

any

other claim, "proof" is an absolute that is either achieved, or not,

through

the accumulation of evidence. "Extraordinanry evidence" is simply an
unatainable goal and a debunker ploy. There is no such thing as
"extraordinary evidence" just as there is no such thing as

"extraordinary

proof".

In my opinion, Carl Sagan was wrong for the above reasons.

That's because your brainpower is limited and not capable of
understandingn the above statements. You are a dumbass, plain and
simple. You can't hide it. It shows in every post you make, dipshit.

I wrote them, I'm pretty sure I understand them. I hope some of it is
spelled wrong, just for you.

hahaha...how many critically acclaimed science-for-laymen books have
you authored that have been made into long-running PBS television
series?

None, what relevance does it have?

Plenty. It speaks for his relevance to many thousands, nay millions,
of people.

Which is still not relevant to the subject. Are you sure you know what
relevant means?

How many games has Carl Sagan designed? I

Games?  How many games have you designed that any one other than
yourself has ever heard of? You are a self-important dumb shit.

Several, that's what I do. Why do you think I said it? Why do you think I am
so good at this little dubunkery game, huh? I know more about games than
just about anybody, and that's all this nonsense is, a silly little game.

One thing I am pretty
sure of though, is that his response would not have resembled yours in

any

way.

Of course not. He was polite to all people. I am only polite to people
who are not Kooks like you, dipshit.

But I am not a kook. I have done nothing "kooky", said nothing "kooky", or
even implied anything "kooky". You simply have a deep, demented need to
label me a kook. No outside observer would call me a kook based on anything
I have said or done in this newsgroup, while many would call you a kook. The
really sad thing is that you honestly don't realize this.

Kangaroo...you are a profoundly stupid dipshit. Shut the fuck up,
please.

If I were profoundly stupid you would not be replying too my posts.

Again, you misuse the word too, showing once again just how profoundly
stupid you really are.

I could have begun hitting the spell check button ages ago, but your
attacking my spelling and grammar has more of a negative effect on you than
it does on me. You really are bad at this game.

haha...laughing at you, dumbass.

Actually I think it is uncontrollable laughter. You might want to see a
doctor about that.