From: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Hypocrite (that's spelled  H Y P O C R I T E)...
Summary: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Reply-To: kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown)
Organization: Minimal.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 05:15:49 GMT

Sorry for leaving in Roger's discussion, but I wanted people to see what
was being talked about.

Yes, it's "bash Ted Holden day" again.  Or "HOlden", as he puts it in his sig
below.  Doesn't he, or his news software, know about automatic signatures?
Maybe filing clerks such as himself (why else would he be stuck working
in the Federal Filing building?  Apologies to filing clerks around the
world, excluding Ted) aren't allowed to have .signatures.  Or maybe he
hasn't figured out how to edit his.  He sure hasn't figured out how
to do search and replace properly.  Just check out the right parenthesis
bracketing the first reference entry up there (and bracketing the article
ID in the intro to Roger's article), and notice how he used the same
character for his quotation marker...

Anyway, I laughed for a couple of minutes when I saw this...

In article <2717@fedfil.UUCP> news@fedfil.UUCP (news, a.k.a. Ted Holden) writes:
>In article <csqj!b_@lynx.unm.edu), rsquires@cyclops.eece.unm.edu (Roger Squires) writes:
>) Some time ago, before he rode off into the sunset reading War and Peace
>) (I never did like Tolstoy; Solzhenitsyn is better, IMO) Mr. Holden had a post
>) concerning how sauropods who were once considered to be water dwellers
>) are now considered to be terrestrial beings.  I thought this was interesting
>) and have tried to do some reading (superficial, alas) on the subject.
> 
>) Now, my copy of _Dinosaurs of the Southwest_ by Ratkevich, published in
>) 1976, in discussing Sauropoda, says:
>) 	Once thought to have been the largest of the land vertebrates,
>) 	species of sauropods like Brachiosaurus,...are now considered to
>) 	have been completely, or almost completely, water animals.
>) 	Their tremendous weights...would surely have damaged vital body
>) 	structures had they ventured onto dry land for very long.
>) A nice full-page picture of a sauropod paddling merrily along follows.
> 
>) I have also been looking at _Dinosaur Tracks_, by Thulborn, 1990.
>) On page 172 of this book, the author mentions tracks found by a researcher
>) named Bird ('40s) who interpreted tracks he had found as being those of a
>) swimming sauropod, and again a floating sauropod is shown.  Mr. Thulborn
>) does not mention anything about how controversial this proposal of Bird is,
>) and indeed gives a reference to a paper by Ishigaki.  It looks like Mr. 
>) Thulborn is much more concerned in this book with methodology than
>) interpretation.
>)
>) So I looked up Ishigaki's paper in _Dinosaur Tracks and Traces_,
>) 1989, _Footprints of Swimming Sauropods from Morocco_, where he says
>) in the abstract that "This supports R. T. Bird's theory of sauropod
>) swimming ability."  And here I thought "Wow!  This blows Mr. Holden out of
>) the water (as it were)!  If the dinosaur is swimming you don't need
>) the felt effect of gravity."
>
>I still have one or two evenings a week for usenet;  I simply  don't have time
>for reading pure bs, e.g. papers concerning ice cores, varves etc.
>
>Your book is dated, the ideas in it long since disproved, other than for the
>rather obvious fact that sauropods could not, as your book stated, live
>on land TODAY IN OUR WORLD, GRAVITY BEING WHAT IT IS NOW.  
>That much ofwhat you read is indeed correct.  

This has got to be the funniest thing I've seen Ted post on this newsgroup.

*Roger*'s book is dated???  His reference is scarcely 3 years old!  16
years old at most, if you're talking about the 1976 book he refers to.

Who the hell are *you* to talk about "dated" references, when you use
stuff that goes back not just to the '60's, '40's, or even the turn of
the century, but rely *mainly* on stuff that goes back THOUSANDS OF
YEARS?  *His* book is dated??

What about *yours*???

You've got to be the biggest hypocrite I've seen on the net to date.
Even Bales does a better job of being reasonable than YOU.

It figures, too.  Most of the "businessmen" (like yourself) I've seen
or heard about (like Lee Iacocca, to name one) are hypocrites, too (how
many Mercedes does Iacocca own?  How many Porsches?  How many times have
we heard him say "buy American"?).  Probably has something to do with the
"felt effect of hypocrisy", which correlates strongly with the "felt
effect of airheadedness", both of which are off the scale in your
presence.

By the way, you needn't worry about this posting damaging your
"credibility", as you have none to damage...

I strongly suggest you go back to micromanaging your fellow filing clerks.

>Ted HOlden
>HTE
>
>
>
>Ted Holden
>HTE
>
>
>
>-- 
>HTE
>bear

So much space taken up by his (Ted's) signature.  So little substance.  More
substance than one finds in his postings, though, probably because someone
else typed in his signature for him...

		Kevin Brown (kevin@taronga.taronga.com)