@spendius,
Actually, this is a lie--the sort of thing one can expect from Spurious. I don't "have" anyone "on ignore." I simply ignore Spurious because he is a puerile, self-centered ****-wit.
@oolongteasup,
I SAW An UFO in De4laware once. I knew it was a UFO because, on its starboard it had the letters U F O clearly spelled out.
So There!!
I beg to differ with you. He's one of the most glaring examples of intellectual masturbatory oral diarrhea whom i have ever encountered
@Setanta,
Quote:He's one of the most glaring examples of intellectual masturbatory oral diarrhea whom i have ever encountered
Out of how many one feels tempted to ask?
@OmSigDAVID,
why isn't "should" "shud?
Do you pronounce "late" "leight"?
It's an affectation Dave. Admit it. Heresy really from a philosophical point of view.
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
why isn't "should" "shud?
Do you pronounce "late" "leight"?
It's an affectation Dave. Admit it. Heresy really from a philosophical point of view.
The only reason for not using shud, Spendius,
is to quiet the near hysteria that I got from it.
MY point was that there is no logical reason to put an
L
into wud, cud nor shud.
Some folks believe that spelling it shoud is closer to pronunciation.
David
@OmSigDAVID,
That's because some folks don't understand how the English language works very well.
Learn Spanish, you'll love it
Cycloptichorn
@OmSigDAVID,
David wrote:Some folks believe that spelling it shoud is closer to pronunciation.
How woud you fonetikaly spel
shroud?
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
That's because some folks don't understand how the English language works very well.
Learn Spanish, you'll love it
Cycloptichorn
U can drive a car with a flat tire,
but it works better with all 4 of them being round.
David
@Francis,
Francis wrote:
David wrote:Some folks believe that spelling it shoud is closer to pronunciation.
How woud you fonetikaly spel
shroud?
That 's pretty good; it matches the sound in
OUT.
In the end, we 'll need fonetic lexicografers
to reason everything out, polish it, and commit it into new fonetic dictionaries.
Children will be tawt from those nu dictionaries.
David
@OmSigDAVID,
Nah.. "The duchesses suspender straps were so tawt Gerald closed his eyes" doesn't work for me. "Taut" is much better.
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
Nah.. "The duchesses suspender straps were so tawt Gerald closed his eyes" doesn't work for me.
"Taut" is much better.
OK; no problem,
but we will still need nu correct dictionaries.
I bought the book by Donald Keyhoe , The Flying saucers are real , to quote from this book , Author's Note
" ON APRIL 27, 1949 , the US Air Force Stated :
The mere existence of some yet unidentified flying objects necessitates a constant vigilance on the part of Project ' Saucer ' personnel and on the part of the civilian population.
Answers have been - and will be - drawn from such factors as guided missile research activity , balloons , astronomical phenomena....But there are still question marks.
Possibilities that the saucers are foreign aircraft have also been considered ....But observations based on nuclear power plant research in this country label as ' highly improbable ' the existence on Earth of engines small enough to have powered the saucers.
Intelligent life on Mars....is not impossible but is completely unproven. The possibility of intelligent life on the Planet Venus is not considered completely unreasonable by astronomers.
The saucers are not jokes. Neither are the cause for alarm. "
Interesting , especially the first and last statement by the Air Force
