In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:04:59 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:11:09 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:55:59 +0000, Malcolm
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In article ,
>>>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>>>On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 07:37:50 +0000, Malcolm
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>The subject of my PhD is in the public domain and obviously I'm proud to
>>>>>>>>see it there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Seems it took you at least six years to get your PhD from your first
>>>>>>>degree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>It seems that you are wrong. How unsurprising.
>>>>>
>>>>>Doesn't look like it. How long from your first degree to your PhD?
>>>>>
>>>>I remain flattered that you are so interested in my academic
>>>>achievements of many years ago.
>>>
>>>Good for you.
>>>
>>No, Angus, good for you for taking such a great interest in me.
>>
>
>It's good fun.
>
Well, I suppose it is teaching you how to search the internet, which is 
a skill you might find handy some time.

>>>>
>>>>Work it out for yourself, bearing in mind that the answer is not six
>>>>years :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> 1977 to 1983 does seem like six years to me - or are you lying?
>>>
>>What sort of a person who, when he can't understand something
>>immediately thinks that it must be a lie? Oh, I know, a person like
>>Angus Macmillan.
>>
>
>Is 77 to 83 not six?  I suppose it could be 7 inclusively but I was
>giving you the benefit of the doubt.  Maybe you're thicker than I
>thought :-))
>
It's you who are being thick, Angus.

>
>>>>>>>And as far as I'm aware  "Member of the Institute of Biology and
>>>>>>>Chartered Biologist (MIBiol, CBiol)" is not a qualification but merely
>>>>>>>membership of an organisation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your awareness is, as always, letting you down. How unsurprising.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>What's unsurprising is that you are claiming it's a qualification.
>>>>>
>>>>No, it isn't.
>>>>
>>>>>So what qualification is it?
>>>>>
>>>>Work it out for yourself.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Looking at their website it seems that it's not a qualification. So
>>>why are you claiming it is?
>>>
>>Perhaps you can't read. Or, and there's plenty of evidence for this, you
>>lack comprehension skills.
>>
>
>So what actual qualifications do they offer?
>
Read their website.

>
>>>Looks like you could be faking your qualifications.  Is that the case?
>>>
>>Looks like you could be getting very close to libelling me. Is that the
>>case?
>>
>
>Is it the case you're faking your qualifications?
>
Is it the case you are getting very close to libelling me?

>
>>>>>>>  So why do you list it as a
>>>>>>>"qualification" in your biography?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm not surprised that you can't work it out. Obviously not simple
>>>>>>enough for you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Seems very simple.  You are claiming it's a qualification and I don't
>>>>>think it is.
>>>>>
>>>>What you think is of no consequence whatsoever, Angus, on this or any
>>>>other subject.
>>>
>>>It is if you're bullshitting the public.
>>>
>>You're the master bullshitter, on woodlands, squirrels, non-natives,
>>avian flu, walking in the countryside, fences, etc., etc.
>>
>
>Not me.  I don't claim to be an expert in anything.  I presume a
>"master" might be regarded as an expert.
>
No, on the whole, experts don't bullshit. They've no need to because 
they've got the requisite knowledge. It's the non-experts, desperately 
trying to make an impression, that bullshit all the time, just as you do 
on woodlands, squirrels, non-natvies, avian flu, walking in the 
countryside, fences, etc., etc.  After all, the definition of bullshit 
fits you perfectly: "Talk emptily or boastfully."

>
>>>>>Who is correct?
>>>>>
>>>>Well, you're not :-)
>>>>>
>>>
>>>Seems I might be.
>>>
>>But, as we know only too well, you get things wrong all the time, don't
>>you?
>>
>
>Not me.  I just expose fakes.
>
More bullshitting. You can only say that when you've actually done it.

>>>
>>>>>>> Are you just bullshitting the
>>>>>>>public?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>No, Angus, I leave that entirely to you with your ridiculous remarks
>>>>>>about squirrels, avian flu, woodlands, and fences, as well as your vile
>>>>>>and contemptible crowing about people dying, without a thought for their
>>>>>>relatives and friends.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have no objection to people getting shot while out hunting - the
>>>>>more the merrier
>>>>>
>>>>Thank you for confirming just how despicable you are.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Not at all. Live by the gun; die by the gun.  Seems fair.
>>>
>>Despicable.
>>
>
>Why?
>
If you don't even know, that just makes you even more despicable.

>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Read what I wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I did. More importantly, I also noted that you didn't alter 
>>>>>>>>>>the subject
>>>>>>>>>>line of the message.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Good for you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, I'm observant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No you're not; you're blinded by conceit and self importance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Not at all. I continue to be flattered that you take so much interest in
>>>>>>me and my qualifications.
>>>>>
>>>>>One of which seems to be fake?
>>>>>
>>>>Are you claiming that I have a fake qualification? Yes or no.
>>>>
>>>
>>>It does seem that way.  You seem to be claiming a qualification where
>>>one doesn't exist.
>>>
>>You are getting very close to libelling me. So don't say I didn't warn
>>you.
>>
>
>Well, I'm asking you what qualification do they offer.  Seems strange
>you can't tell me and others on this ng.
>
I'm sure they can read as well as you can.

Perhaps they will read this, which I'm sure you found unwelcome 
information:

Members and Fellows are awarded Chartered Biologist (CBiol) status, the 
professional qualification for bioscientists, recognised throughout 
Europe as a hallmark of excellence. It demonstrates a high level of 
attainment in biological experience, personal integrity, professional 
attributes and academic qualifications.

>>>>>
>>>>>Why don't you tell us?
>>>>>
>>>>I prefer to let you find out for yourself. I find it more amusing.
>>>>
>>>>>Ashamed?
>>>>>
>>>>You should be ashamed of gloating over the deaths of your fellow humans.
>>>
>>>Not at all. Live by the gun; die by the gun.  Seems fair to me.
>>>
>>Perhaps you would like to write a letter to the newspapers saying that
>>you don't care about deaths of our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.
>
>They're not hunting innocent wildlife that can't shoot back.
>
Doesn't matter. They have guns and they shoot.

>As far as I am concerned those who hunt wildlife are welcome to shoot
>each other.
>
>Seems fair to me.
>
Your attitude is truly despicable.

-- 
Malcolm