*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote

> Racist pig.

The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.

Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.

Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?

> No surprise.

Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
ever bothering to look at the cites.

There were two types of cites in the OP:
1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing

> He already others based on the statistically
> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.

What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
You did not.

What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
That's why they have those quartile markers.

You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
What do _you_ think they're there for?

> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.

Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.

Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).

What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.

As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.

> Braggart knuckledragger.

I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.

But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?

> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.

What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.

The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
bearer.

Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).
--
The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.

On 2023-12-24 09:37, Wally J wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>
>> Racist pig.
>
> The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
> capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.

Wait...

....I thought it was ME who couldn't understand what a catenary

>
> Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
> everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.
>
> Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
> uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?
>
>> No surprise.
>
> Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
> are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
> ever bothering to look at the cites.
>
> There were two types of cites in the OP:
> 1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
> 2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing
>
>> He already others based on the statistically
>> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
>> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.
>
> What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
> You did not.
>
> What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
> That's why they have those quartile markers.
>
> You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
> What do _you_ think they're there for?
>
>> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
>> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.
>
> Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
> I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.
>
> Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
> a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
> b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).
>
> What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
> important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.

And an object that is supporting it's own weight in a (semi-)continuous
manner...

....which isn't anything a racing car is doing when it goes around a corner.

>
> As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
> and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
> of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.

Not one of the instructors I've worked with...

....dozens...

....nor any of the books on race driving

....has ever mentioned it.

>
>> Braggart knuckledragger.
>
> I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
> that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.
>
> But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
> simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?
>
>> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.
>
> What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
> Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
> Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.
>
> The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
> class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
> is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
> bearer.

I know exactly what a catenary is...

....and I learned it when I studied physics and calculus...

....in both high school AND university.

>
> Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
> catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
> the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).

It doesn't. That isn't the curve a racing vehicle takes around a corner.

If you ask nicely, I'll tell you what is.

:-)

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2023-12-24 09:37, Wally J wrote:
>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>>
>>> Racist pig.
>>
>> The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
>> capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.
>
> Wait...
>
> ...I thought it was ME who couldn't understand what a catenary
>
>>
>> Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
>> everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.
>>
>> Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
>> uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?
>>
>>> No surprise.
>>
>> Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
>> are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
>> ever bothering to look at the cites.
>>
>> There were two types of cites in the OP:
>> 1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
>> 2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing
>>
>>> He already others based on the statistically
>>> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
>>> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.
>>
>> What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
>> You did not.
>>
>> What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
>> That's why they have those quartile markers.
>>
>> You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
>> What do _you_ think they're there for?
>>
>>> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
>>> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.
>>
>> Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
>> I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.
>>
>> Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
>> a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
>> b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).
>>
>> What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
>> important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.
>
> And an object that is supporting it's own weight in a (semi-)continuous
> manner...
>
> ...which isn't anything a racing car is doing when it goes around a corner.
>
>>
>> As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
>> and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
>> of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.
>
> Not one of the instructors I've worked with...
>
> ...dozens...
>
> ...nor any of the books on race driving
>
> ...has ever mentioned it.
>
>>
>>> Braggart knuckledragger.
>>
>> I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
>> that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.
>>
>> But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
>> simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?
>>
>>> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.
>>
>> What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
>> Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
>> Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.
>>
>> The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
>> class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
>> is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
>> bearer.
>
> I know exactly what a catenary is...
>
> ...and I learned it when I studied physics and calculus...
>
> ...in both high school AND university.
>
>>
>> Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
>> catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
>> the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).
>
> It doesn't. That isn't the curve a racing vehicle takes around a corner.
>
> If you ask nicely, I'll tell you what is.
>
> :-)
>
Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
advanced degrees though.

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-12-24 09:37, Wally J wrote:
>>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>>>
>>>> Racist pig.
>>>
>>> The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
>>> capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.
>>
>> Wait...
>>
>> ...I thought it was ME who couldn't understand what a catenary
>>
>>>
>>> Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
>>> everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.
>>>
>>> Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
>>> uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?
>>>
>>>> No surprise.
>>>
>>> Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
>>> are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
>>> ever bothering to look at the cites.
>>>
>>> There were two types of cites in the OP:
>>> 1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
>>> 2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing
>>>
>>>> He already others based on the statistically
>>>> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
>>>> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.
>>>
>>> What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
>>> You did not.
>>>
>>> What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
>>> That's why they have those quartile markers.
>>>
>>> You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
>>> What do _you_ think they're there for?
>>>
>>>> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
>>>> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.
>>>
>>> Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
>>> I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.
>>>
>>> Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
>>> a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
>>> b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).
>>>
>>> What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
>>> important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.
>>
>> And an object that is supporting it's own weight in a (semi-)continuous
>> manner...
>>
>> ...which isn't anything a racing car is doing when it goes around a corner.
>>
>>>
>>> As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
>>> and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
>>> of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.
>>
>> Not one of the instructors I've worked with...
>>
>> ...dozens...
>>
>> ...nor any of the books on race driving
>>
>> ...has ever mentioned it.
>>
>>>
>>>> Braggart knuckledragger.
>>>
>>> I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
>>> that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.
>>>
>>> But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
>>> simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?
>>>
>>>> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.
>>>
>>> What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
>>> Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
>>> Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.
>>>
>>> The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
>>> class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
>>> is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
>>> bearer.
>>
>> I know exactly what a catenary is...
>>
>> ...and I learned it when I studied physics and calculus...
>>
>> ...in both high school AND university.
>>
>>>
>>> Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
>>> catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
>>> the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).
>>
>> It doesn't. That isn't the curve a racing vehicle takes around a corner.
>>
>> If you ask nicely, I'll tell you what is.
>>
>> :-)
>>
> Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
> immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
> advanced degrees though.

So does he. He has read some (old) books apparently and is able to take
pictures of them.

On 2023-12-24 14:41, Chris wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2023-12-24 09:37, Wally J wrote:
>>>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Racist pig.
>>>>
>>>> The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
>>>> capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.
>>>
>>> Wait...
>>>
>>> ...I thought it was ME who couldn't understand what a catenary
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
>>>> everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.
>>>>
>>>> Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
>>>> uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?
>>>>
>>>>> No surprise.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
>>>> are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
>>>> ever bothering to look at the cites.
>>>>
>>>> There were two types of cites in the OP:
>>>> 1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
>>>> 2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing
>>>>
>>>>> He already others based on the statistically
>>>>> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
>>>>> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.
>>>>
>>>> What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
>>>> You did not.
>>>>
>>>> What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
>>>> That's why they have those quartile markers.
>>>>
>>>> You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
>>>> What do _you_ think they're there for?
>>>>
>>>>> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
>>>>> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.
>>>>
>>>> Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
>>>> I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.
>>>>
>>>> Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
>>>> a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
>>>> b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).
>>>>
>>>> What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
>>>> important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.
>>>
>>> And an object that is supporting it's own weight in a (semi-)continuous
>>> manner...
>>>
>>> ...which isn't anything a racing car is doing when it goes around a corner.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
>>>> and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
>>>> of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.
>>>
>>> Not one of the instructors I've worked with...
>>>
>>> ...dozens...
>>>
>>> ...nor any of the books on race driving
>>>
>>> ...has ever mentioned it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Braggart knuckledragger.
>>>>
>>>> I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
>>>> that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.
>>>>
>>>> But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
>>>> simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?
>>>>
>>>>> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.
>>>>
>>>> What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
>>>> Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
>>>> Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
>>>> class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
>>>> is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
>>>> bearer.
>>>
>>> I know exactly what a catenary is...
>>>
>>> ...and I learned it when I studied physics and calculus...
>>>
>>> ...in both high school AND university.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
>>>> catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
>>>> the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).
>>>
>>> It doesn't. That isn't the curve a racing vehicle takes around a corner.
>>>
>>> If you ask nicely, I'll tell you what is.
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>> Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
>> immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
>> advanced degrees though.
>
> So does he. He has read some (old) books apparently and is able to take
> pictures of them.
>

It looks more and more like Arlen simply encounters one book or paper
(or something) and whatever that first thing says on a particular
subject becomes his gospel forevermore.

:-)

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2023-12-24 14:41, Chris wrote:
>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-12-24 09:37, Wally J wrote:
>>>>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> Racist pig.
>>>>>
>>>>> The child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks lack the basic adult
>>>>> capacity to comprehend even the simplest of concepts such as a catenary.
>>>>
>>>> Wait...
>>>>
>>>> ...I thought it was ME who couldn't understand what a catenary
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nor can these child-like uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks comprehend that
>>>>> everyone (yes, everyone!) fits in one of the D-K test results quartiles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Given those two facts, how could anyone have expected these child-like
>>>>> uneducated low-IQ ignorant iKooks to comprehend Apple's marketing strategy?
>>>>>
>>>>>> No surprise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I'm surprised you're the only one who responded that way, as you
>>>>> are already on record for making guesses as to what's in the cites, without
>>>>> ever bothering to look at the cites.
>>>>>
>>>>> There were two types of cites in the OP:
>>>>> 1. The first type were examples of Apple's marketing
>>>>> 2. The second type were _analysis_ of Apple's marketing
>>>>>
>>>>>> He already others based on the statistically
>>>>>> suspect Dunning Kruger effect that he is incapable to realize has flaws
>>>>>> given his pseudointellectual tendencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I said about D-K was I read (and understood) the seminal papers.
>>>>> You did not.
>>>>>
>>>>> What you don't understand, for example, is everyone fits on the D-K scale.
>>>>> That's why they have those quartile markers.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have noticed the D-K quartile markers, Hemidactylus, haven't you?
>>>>> What do _you_ think they're there for?
>>>>>
>>>>>> He criticizes Alan who is an expert in teaching of car racing skills
>>>>>> because he allegedly knows more than anyone else about everything.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now you're being too nice to me, Hemidactylus, in praising my skills.
>>>>> I clearly stated I know nothing about racing. I said I understood bimmers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once you're well educated, you learn enough to know two important things:
>>>>> a. Other well educated people know more than you do in their fields, and,
>>>>> b. You can easily apply your vast education to other fields (e.g., racing).
>>>>>
>>>>> What I _said_ was that the catenary is a specific shape for an extremely
>>>>> important reason, having all to do with Newtonian forces in nature.
>>>>
>>>> And an object that is supporting it's own weight in a (semi-)continuous
>>>> manner...
>>>>
>>>> ...which isn't anything a racing car is doing when it goes around a corner.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As such, it's one of the most important curves possible in racing circuits,
>>>>> and the fact that someone quoted Alan Baker as saying he's never even heard
>>>>> of the catenary, is a problem because an "expert" isn't that ignorant.
>>>>
>>>> Not one of the instructors I've worked with...
>>>>
>>>> ...dozens...
>>>>
>>>> ...nor any of the books on race driving
>>>>
>>>> ...has ever mentioned it.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Braggart knuckledragger.
>>>>>
>>>>> I realize all you iKooks lack education so your only defense to knowledge
>>>>> that everyone else has attained except you, is to try to insult them.
>>>>>
>>>>> But wouldn't it be better if you took a Physics or Calculus class and
>>>>> simply learned what a catenary is and how it applies to racing circuits?
>>>>>
>>>>>> He is the punchline of the joke he starts but can't finish.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's patently clear is you do not know what a catenary is, Hemidactylus.
>>>>> Therefore, you do not know how a catenary applies to the forces of nature.
>>>>> Nor, as a result, are you aware of how those forces apply to racing.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that EVERYONE on the planet who has taken a Physics or Calculus
>>>>> class knows EXACTLY what a catenary is - and you and Alan Baker do not -
>>>>> is the reason that your only response to facts is to try to insult the
>>>>> bearer.
>>>>
>>>> I know exactly what a catenary is...
>>>>
>>>> ...and I learned it when I studied physics and calculus...
>>>>
>>>> ...in both high school AND university.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of claiming I am a "knuckedragger" because _you_ don't know what a
>>>>> catenary is... why don't you - instead - look up how a catenary applies
>>>>> the Newtonian forces of nature to the teaching of proper racing circuits).
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't. That isn't the curve a racing vehicle takes around a corner.
>>>>
>>>> If you ask nicely, I'll tell you what is.
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>> Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
>>> immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
>>> advanced degrees though.
>>
>> So does he. He has read some (old) books apparently and is able to take
>> pictures of them.
>>
>
> It looks more and more like Arlen simply encounters one book or paper
> (or something) and whatever that first thing says on a particular
> subject becomes his gospel forevermore.
>
> :-)
>
There is a controversy in psychology on what the alleged Dunning Kruger
effect actually is and not only is Arlen avoiding that I doubt the
originators intended for it to be weaponized as it has been. Sad state
really.

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote

> Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
> immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
> advanced degrees though.

Wait. Didn't Chris just moments ago say he knows about immunology?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/9eiX08J_g_w/m/UYq6FGk7BAAJ>
From: Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2023 00:43:49 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <umaj85$2ot4c$1@dont-email.me>
BTW horizontal gene transfer (or inheritance) is quite well established
in the microbiology literature. Not just for antibiotic resistance.

Something must be going around...
--
A handful of Coronaviridae are known to cause about 1/3rd of all common
colds, while it takes hundreds of other viruses to cause the other 2/3rds.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote

>> Given I know a thing or two about lateral genetic transfer in bacteria and
>> immunology in humans he just wound up flying into my cobweb. I lack
>> advanced degrees though.
>
> So does he. He has read some (old) books apparently and is able to take
> pictures of them.

I don't care who says something as long as what they say makes sense.

While the iKooks ridiculing of textbooks simply shows they lack a college
education, I respect people who make sensible assessments of facts, so I
just want to state that "lateral genetic transfer" is something a scientist
would say, so kudos to Hemidactylus, and kudos also to Chris who said
"horizontal gene transfer is quite well established", both of which are
sentient statements.

Assuming, a priori, that they weren't cropped out of a google search...

I'm actually shocked.
In a good way.

Most of the time, the iKooks are claiming there are apps which do things
when those apps don't exist (e.g., the infamous Wi-Fi debugging apps)
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>
Where Snit made this infamous video proving he's inconscionably stupid:
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo> iKooks can't even see the fatal flaw!

Yet, here we are, on an Apple newsgroup, where both Chris and Hemidactylus
actually formed logically sensible statements about genetic transfer
mechanisms. I'm shocked. I'm impressed.

Let's hope the respect you just gained remains in your response.

Where knowledge of genetics and immunology matters is when we discuss
Covid, and in particular, how SARS-CoV-2 is a formidable adversary.
--
Sometimes I forget that the iKooks are actual living human beings.

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote

> There is a controversy in psychology on what the alleged Dunning Kruger
> effect actually is and not only is Arlen avoiding that I doubt the
> originators intended for it to be weaponized as it has been. Sad state
> really.

Hi Hemidactylus,

I study the strange iKooks, who, let's be clear, constantly fabricate
imaginary functionality for iOS that simply does not exist (& never has).

However... perhaps you (and maybe even Chris) do have the functional
capacity to understand whom Apple aims its marketing campaigns at, and,
what those analysis I posted in the original post say about that.

Given I just read a sentient sentence moments ago from you on immunology,
I'm going to speak with you in this post as if you're _not_ an iKook. OK?

My point of contention with you deprecating the D-K effect wasn't that you
deprecated the D-K effect; it was that you deprecated it without
understanding it. That's a _big_ difference.

You know there's a well-known professor, John Mearsheimer, and another
just-as-well-known professor, Steven Kotkin, both of whom speak about the
origins of the current war in Ukraine, where I disagree with Mearsheimer
and I almost completely agree with Kotkin - but - I accept that both of
them are starting from the same data points - in that they understand the
Russian psyche and Russian history and the Russian mentality.

My point is that I can agree or disagree with someone, but I respect their
acumen, as they've shown that they understand the basics of the situation.

When you deprecated D-K and in the next sentences you told me they didn't
test English Grammar results, I instantly knew you lied about having read
the seminal papers (simply because they _did_ test students on that).

I knew you were lying, and yet, you were trying to claim you understood the
D-K effect, where you did not then (and still do not now) show any
comprehension that EVERYONE fits on the Dunning-Kruger scales - which is
why I had mentioned the iKooks are to the left of the first quartile.

Then you ridiculed Mount Stupid, as if I had claimed I came up with it,
when in fact, those graphs are clearly an extrapolation of the D-K data.

In my own posts about Mount Stupid, in fact, I also supplied the D-K
graphs, which (as you noted) look nothing directly like the Mount Stupid
ones - but the difference here is I understood what BOTH were trying to
convey.

You did not, and there is still no indication that you do understand them.

Remember always that the iKooks lie all the time (e.g., Jolly Roger claims
Apple fully patches all releases when Apple simply does not do that), so it
was clear to me you were lying when you claimed to have read the seminal
papers.

Hence, you can't possibly _dispute_ them since you never even read them.

Moving forward, I treat Usenet as water under the bridge. If you earn my
respect by showing you actually _understand_ what the D-K effect tries to
portray, then (and only then) is it possible for you to refute that effect.
--
The iKooks must, by their very nature, hang out with people who are not
well educated because their excuses are so easily destroyed with facts.

On 2023-12-24 20:50, Wally J wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote
>
>> There is a controversy in psychology on what the alleged Dunning Kruger
>> effect actually is and not only is Arlen avoiding that I doubt the
>> originators intended for it to be weaponized as it has been. Sad state
>> really.
>
> Hi Hemidactylus,
>
> I study the strange iKooks, who, let's be clear, constantly fabricate
> imaginary functionality for iOS that simply does not exist (& never has).
>
> However... perhaps you (and maybe even Chris) do have the functional
> capacity to understand whom Apple aims its marketing campaigns at, and,
> what those analysis I posted in the original post say about that.

That should be "...TO whom Apple aims its marketing..." with no "at".

>
> Given I just read a sentient sentence moments ago from you on immunology,
> I'm going to speak with you in this post as if you're _not_ an iKook. OK?
>
> My point of contention with you deprecating the D-K effect wasn't that you
> deprecated the D-K effect; it was that you deprecated it without
> understanding it. That's a _big_ difference.
>
> You know there's a well-known professor, John Mearsheimer, and another
> just-as-well-known professor, Steven Kotkin, both of whom speak about the
> origins of the current war in Ukraine, where I disagree with Mearsheimer
> and I almost completely agree with Kotkin - but - I accept that both of
> them are starting from the same data points - in that they understand the
> Russian psyche and Russian history and the Russian mentality.

And this is not you distracting from the subject at hand?