FYI Bio zoom ZZZZZZZZ

Juan Jimenez wrote:

Any aviation-related records on issues such as:

- size
- weight
- capacity
- feats of strength associated with or performed with aircraft
- repetition records associated with aircraft
- anything not covered by FAI categories but clearly aviation-related

Next!

Hey, moron! You left out "Relevance!"

"Feats of Strength?" HA! He's hardly the man of steel...

But he is repititious, just like you! Like I said, he trained you,
right!? Mmmm...maybe the collar doesn't look so bad on you after all.

I mean, good Lord ~ beyond James R. Campbell, you must be the most
insane person on the face of this Earth! I think we need to check in
and see who gave you a license ~ I think that in denial, as pilots go,
you're more dangerous than Campbell! And that's saying a lot!

There is no "next" in my response ~ since you're the only assclown
defending the son of a bitch.

And I have all the time in the World to respond to your rubbish.

"DABEAR" wrote in message
ups.com...

Juan Jimenez wrote:

Any aviation-related records on issues such as:

- size
- weight
- capacity
- feats of strength associated with or performed with aircraft
- repetition records associated with aircraft
- anything not covered by FAI categories but clearly aviation-related

Next!

Hey, moron! You left out "Relevance!"

What would you know about relevance, sonny? "Aviation-related". It's just
two words! Which one is giving you problems? Even a twit like you ought to
be able to figure that one out.

As I said, putz, the statement that FAI is the repository of all
"aviation-related" records is wrong. Period.

Next!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Yawn wrote:

As I said, putz, the statement that FAI is the repository of all
"aviation-related" records is wrong. Period.


I think you're backpeddaling, Yawn. My argument, along with others, is
in regards to whom should be certifying records and why. Cheats like
Jim Campbell, supported by your arguments, could claim just about
anything without the FAI or the NAA around.

In fact, it's clear that's exactly what he's trying to pull...claim
records in categories that don't even exist except in the mind of a
legend in his own mind.

Nice try, Yawn...but this time, you backpeddaled into your own sword
and just lost the argument. You should have stuck with what you didn't
know...LOL!

DABEAR wrote:
Yawn wrote:

As I said, putz, the statement that FAI is the repository of all
"aviation-related" records is wrong. Period.


I think you're backpeddaling, Yawn. My argument, along with others, is
in regards to whom should be certifying records and why. Cheats like
Jim Campbell, supported by your arguments, could claim just about
anything without the FAI or the NAA around.

In fact, it's clear that's exactly what he's trying to pull...claim
records in categories that don't even exist except in the mind of a
legend in his own mind.

Nice try, Yawn...but this time, you backpeddaled into your own sword
and just lost the argument. You should have stuck with what you didn't
know...LOL!

By yawn's "logic" if you write down (somewhere, anywhere) that you
have set a record then you have. That means campbell can write he flew a
B-17D to 50 kilofeet it's a record, true or not, since it has been recorded.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Dan" wrote in message
...

By yawn's "logic" if you write down (somewhere, anywhere) that you have
set a record then you have.

And by Dan "Get Over it"'s Logic the word "barograph" means "somewhere,
anywhere". Why do you keep sticking your foot in your mouth, Dan? Because
it feels good when you need to pull it out?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"DABEAR" wrote in message
oups.com...

Yawn wrote:

As I said, putz, the statement that FAI is the repository of all
"aviation-related" records is wrong. Period.


I think you're backpeddaling, Yawn.

You? Thinking? LOL!

My argument, along with others, is in regards to whom should be certifying
records and why.

Oh, I get it. You're assuming I give a **** what you think, Markyboi. Toldya
it was a bad idea for you to try to think.

Next!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Juan Jimenez wrote:



Oh, I get it. You're assuming I give a **** what you think, Markyboi. Toldya
it was a bad idea for you to try to think.

I never assume anything about assholes, Yawnita. They're too damned
predictable...

"DABEAR" wrote in message
ups.com...

Juan Jimenez wrote:



Oh, I get it. You're assuming I give a **** what you think, Markyboi.
Toldya
it was a bad idea for you to try to think.

I never assume anything about assholes
They're too damned predictable...

Okdok, you're now official the expert on predictable assholes. Go forth and
investigate, Markyboi.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Juan Jimenez wrote:


Okdok, you're now official the expert on predictable assholes. Go forth and
investigate, Markyboi.

Well, we could poll the newsgroup here and see if I'm right or wrong
about you and Jim?

Seeing as how they're "good men" unlike you and Jim, I don't know what
their answer will be?

Care to take a chance?