Co-Pilot Needed (URGENT)

"Ed" wrote in message
. ..
Is there a website you can go to self-test for a sense of humor?

Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.


Good try, but seems to be an urban legend:

http://www.snopes.com/language/apocryph/pluckyew.htm

"Matt Barrow" wrote:
Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.

Would you put more faith in it if I could find a Wikipedia article on the
subject? :-)

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote:
Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.

Would you put more faith in it if I could find a Wikipedia article on the
subject? :-)

Well, first of all, if you did provide such EVIDENCE (_real_ evidence, not
flatulent opinions ..especially opinions using selective data), I'd no
longer have to take it on "faith", right. So right there your credibility is
a bit stunted as you don't apparently comprehend what constitutes a proper
epistemology or method.

Secondly, I've seen stuff on Wikipedia (an open encyclopedia) that was
dubious. Noam Chomsky comes to mind.

Thirdly, well, I guess you are just an example of the former. :~)

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote:
Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL
as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.

Would you put more faith in it if I could find a Wikipedia article on
the
subject? :-)

Well, first of all, if you did provide such EVIDENCE (_real_ evidence, not
flatulent opinions ..especially opinions using selective data), I'd no
longer have to take it on "faith", right. So right there your credibility
is
a bit stunted as you don't apparently comprehend what constitutes a proper
epistemology or method.

Secondly, I've seen stuff on Wikipedia (an open encyclopedia) that was
dubious. Noam Chomsky comes to mind.

Thirdly, well, I guess you are just an example of the former. :~)

Addendum:

You still haven't addressed that many Urban Legends are lame attempts at
humor.

Matt Barrow wrote:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.

Would you put more faith in it if I could find a Wikipedia article on the
subject? :-)


Well, first of all, if you did provide such EVIDENCE (_real_ evidence, not
flatulent opinions ..especially opinions using selective data), I'd no
longer have to take it on "faith", right. So right there your credibility is
a bit stunted as you don't apparently comprehend what constitutes a proper
epistemology or method.

Secondly, I've seen stuff on Wikipedia (an open encyclopedia) that was
dubious. Noam Chomsky comes to mind.

Thirdly, well, I guess you are just an example of the former. :~)


I think what Matt is trying to say in so many words is that for him to
believe it, you'll have to get Rush Limbaugh to say it.

HTH.

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote:

Unfortunately not...and there are a lot of "humor challenged" AS WELL
as
those that think if it's not on SNOPES it must be true.

Would you put more faith in it if I could find a Wikipedia article on
the
subject? :-)


Well, first of all, if you did provide such EVIDENCE (_real_ evidence,
not
flatulent opinions ..especially opinions using selective data), I'd no
longer have to take it on "faith", right. So right there your
credibility is
a bit stunted as you don't apparently comprehend what constitutes a
proper
epistemology or method.

Secondly, I've seen stuff on Wikipedia (an open encyclopedia) that was
dubious. Noam Chomsky comes to mind.

Thirdly, well, I guess you are just an example of the former. :~)


I think what Matt is trying to say in so many words is that for him to
believe it, you'll have to get Rush Limbaugh to say it.


I think you are a pompous ass and totally full of ****. Based on this last,
it's proven AFAIC.

AMF.

[plonk]