So remember the prime directive, one and all: Say your piece, but don’t be a dick.

Wish I could grant your paranoid fantasies, but, no, “Bbox231″ and I have nothing in common, except a shared distain for arrogant self-delusionism as exhibited often by folks like yourselves who deem it fit to pontificate, ad nauseum, on whatever the “topic at hand” seems to be, no matter the hour of the day (or night).

Sad news for youse two: You’ve attracted a whole new slew of “critics” (aka flies) for youse to swat at…and we know what kind of material (B)e(S)t attracts flies, don’t we?

Haley’s Comet flies by Earth every 75 years. With similar frequency, Elwood and I inadvertently see eye-to-eye on something,

As for the question of the “original topic at hand,” I believe it had something to do with the outgoing Secretary of Energy, about whom some of us have a difference of opinion.

Thus concludes my commenting on this particular thread. Over and out!

Certainly there are loads smarter than I and JohnW is a wonderful example.

It is curious, however, that JohnW feels a need to rally to the defense of our friend Elwood.

And, what was the original “topic at hand” JohnW?

Just askin’.

Those who choose to veer from the topic at hand and instead opine on somebody else’s knowledge of language, as in #6 and #9, would do well to remember that English is capitalized, to correctly spell grammar and to avoid gratuitous quote marks.

Just sayin’.

Grammer and spelling were nowhere in the original point so, not sure where the heck *that* came from except out of another (not so) smart ass.

Gore earned his Peace Prize. Obama didn’t, as he was the among the first to acknowledge, including during his acceptance speech. He used the occasion of that speech to eloquently say some things about the facts of life that the Nobel committee probably didn’t expect or want to hear. Because it is generally thought that they awarded the prize in hopes of steering him toward a less bellicose foreign policy than that pursued by Bush. His speech wasn’t exactly reassuring to them:

“As the head of state sworn to defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples (MLK and Gandhi) alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake; evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have stopped Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.”

Thank you so much for the lesson in semantics. I’ve found that critics of spelling, semantics and grammar criticize because they have nothing to say.

In other words, nobody loves a smart ass.

Dont know much about physics . . . . or the english language.