On Aug 27, 12:23 am, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:10:46 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On Aug 26, 10:56 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:28:37 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >>  wrote:
> >> >On Aug 26, 6:38 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:41:14 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >On Aug 25, 10:33 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >On Aug 25, 5:23 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:33:12 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 24, 9:29 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:08:55 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 24, 1:08 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:59:13 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 23, 5:48 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 03:57:26 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 23, 12:02 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:20:25 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 22, 7:09 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
>
> >> ><snip>
>
> >> >> >> >So who else, besides yourself, has spotted these "crooks". Name
> >> >> >> >somebody, anybody, who has identified an eco-tourism enterprise as
> >> >> >> >being run by a crook and finger the crook they spotted.
>
> >> >> >> People I speak to frequently refer to conservationists in general as
> >> >> >> crooks when they realise they are damaging the environment rather than
> >> >> >> protecting it to further their own agenda.
>
> >> >> >I asked for a name - any name. You gave me the result of most likely
> >> >> >imaginary conversations you have had.
>
> >> >> SNH to start with. They claim to protect the natural environment but
> >> >> encourage its destruction by increasing the human footprint.
>
> >> >SNH calls conservationists crooks? That's a whopper even by your
> >> >standards.
>
> >> ><snip>
>
> >> You asked for a name and I gave it..  Where did I say SNH calls
> >> conservationists crooks?
>
> >> Like most fake conservationists you start lying when you're stuck.
>
> >Read the thread above. I asked for a name, any name, of somebody other
> >than yourself who has spotted "crooks" masquerading as
> >conservationists. You gave me SNH.
>
> >I accept your apology in advance.
>
> You're right! I misread your post.

It happens. I've done it myself. And thank you for being good enough
to say so, and therefore to distance me from imaginary fake
conservationists that infect your brain so badly :-))))

> >> >> I have often said that charities like the RSPB are indistinguishable
> >> >> from tourist operators by encouraging environmentally damaging
> >> >> activities and by their own admission are responsible for thousands of
> >> >> tourists visiting Islay  I think they claimed 6000 if I remember
> >> >> correctly.
>
> >> >So 6 000 people escaped briefly from hopeless ennui which more-than-
> >> >likely engulfs their lives. And you object to that? Get a life!
>
> >> >> >Stop making stuff up and rejoin
> >> >> >us in the real world - then we can perhaps discuss matters better and
> >> >> >improve the environment for all.
>
> >> >> Not by being fake conservationists.
>
> >> >> >> > It has its codes of conduct ,and all
> >> >> >> >business is ethically reviewed to some degree by the powers that be.
> >> >> >> >So are you saying that all business people are crooks?
>
> >> >> >> No I'm not.  But those even you think are "businesses like any other"
> >> >> >> should be subject to the same rules as other "businesses like any
> >> >> >> other" with regard to misrepresentation.  And misrepresentation in
> >> >> >> business is crooked and seen as such.
>
> >> >> >The mis-representation is a matter for the courts to decide. Take your
> >> >> >evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service. Put up ,or.......hey, you
> >> >> >know the rest.
>
> >> >> As I have said before. the courts are on the side of the
> >> >> "establishment" and if that's not a crooked bunch just ask anybody how
> >> >> this country is being run.  It's rotten from the top down and there is
> >> >> hardly a day goes by when this is not confirmed in one way or another.
> >> >> Even you got out of it.
>
> >> >I didn't "get out" because I was obsessed by paranoiac conspiracy
> >> >theories.
>
> >> You have frequently criticised the UK in your posts here.
>
> >Criticism is nothing to do with ludicrous conspiracy theories.
>
> I don't need conspiracy theories.  The facts are there for all to see.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Woodland Trust are like this. The exploit woodlands for access
> >> >> >> >> >> >> where there was little or no access before.  If that's not bad enough
> >> >> >> >> >> >> they're now consuming agricultural land at a time there is a global
> >> >> >> >> >> >> food shortage.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> And the Mugabe analogy isn't far away.  He hasn't killed as many
> >> >> >> >> >> >> people as he could have killed, just as fake conservationists haven't
> >> >> >> >> >> >> done as much damage as they could have done.  But they're both
> >> >> >> >> >> >> culpable of what they actually do.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >See a professional person concerning this obsessive attachment of
> >> >> >> >> >> >yours to such weird ideas.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> It's not weird at all.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> I think it's you who needs help.to understand.
>
> >> >> >> >> >I understand your state of mind OK. But I have no professional
> >> >> >> >> >qualification to help you deal with it.
>
> >> >> >> >> Your professional qualification doesn't appear to help you deal with
> >> >> >> >> anything.
>
> >> >> >> >Which one of my professional qualifications are you referring to?
>
> >> >> >> Any one you like.
>
> >> >> >In that case I have to tell you that you are wrong. I have a
> >> >> >professional qualification that helps me deal with something.
>
> >> >> Like what?
>
> >> >Well for a start, I know how to deal with the synthesis of a number of
> >> >obscure heterocyclic organic compounds.......
>
> >> Big deal!   Is that all?   Doesn't seem to have done you much good.
>
> >Well you were wrong about that too. I learned to get out of a
> >synthetic chemistry laboratory as fast as possible if I wanted to live
> >to a ripe old age.
>
> So how long did it take you to learn that?

3 years.

> >> >> You seem to be of a kind with Malcolm :-))
>
> >> >Dishing out compliments for a change, eh?
>
> >> You certainly seem to have similar dubious qualities.  Perhaps you
> >> consider that a compliment.  No accounting for what fake
> >> conservationists think.
>
> Seems I was right.

Because I ignore your trivia you think that makes you right. Better
get yourself down to the shrink double quick.

On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:48:09 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
 wrote:

>On Aug 27, 9:23 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:52:34 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>>  wrote:
>> >On Aug 27, 6:04 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:18:08 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>> >>  wrote:
>> >> >On Aug 27, 3:02 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:21:10 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>> >> >>  wrote:
>> >> >> >On Aug 27, 12:23 am, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:10:46 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>> >> >> >>  wrote:
>
>> >>   On the other hand, I have
>> >> never done anything in my life I didn't want to do and enjoyed every
>> >> minute of it.
>>
>> >Obsessive compulsion gets people like that. Born-again christians are
>> >a good example, tramping door-to-door peddling their nonsense and as
>> >happy as the day is long doing it..
>>
>> Or more like trying to get on the local French council and not  making
>> it  and now say the council is undemocratic.  Probably because they
>> didn't want you.
>
>Oh, they wanted me. 

Gosh, really.  Would the mayor confirm that?

>And when did I say the council was undemocratic? I
>said the election was undemocratic, and that was my reason for turning
>down the mayor's offer of a place on his list. 

Well if the election is undemocratic and organised by the council, the
council is undemocratic.


>You really don't read
>other people's post do you. I guess that's part of your being an
>obsessive.

I was recalling your past posts - not reading them at this time.


>
>> <snip>
>
>> >> >> >> >Well you were wrong about that too. I learned to get out of a
>> >> >> >> >synthetic chemistry laboratory as fast as possible if I wanted to live
>> >> >> >> >to a ripe old age.
>>
>> >> >> >> So how long did it take you to learn that?
>>
>> >> >> >3 years.
>>
>> >> >> You're obviously not a fast learner.
>>
>> >> >In the 60s nobody knew what we know today. Some of my colleagues from
>> >> >those days, who made research chemistry their career choice are dead
>> >> >now.
>>
>> >> So you were a research chemist?  How boring.  And here's me thinking
>> >> you were a leading edge scientist.  Were you a professor?
>>
>> >What makes you think I could achieve that after just 3 years post-
>> >grad. Professors spend more time than that in the lab before moving
>> >up.
>>
>> I didn't say after just three years.  So I take it you weren't a
>> professor?  Or a mere ten a penny doctor?
>
>Neither did you read what I wrote, it seems.

So I gather you were neither.  

You're always going on about being a scientist.

Are you ashamed to disclose what you really did?



Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk

All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident. 
-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

On Aug 28, 12:01 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:48:09 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On Aug 27, 9:23 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:52:34 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
> >>  wrote:
> >> >On Aug 27, 6:04 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:18:08 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >On Aug 27, 3:02 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:21:10 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
> >> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> >> >On Aug 27, 12:23 am, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:10:46 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
> >> >> >> >>  wrote:
>
> >> >>   On the other hand, I have
> >> >> never done anything in my life I didn't want to do and enjoyed every
> >> >> minute of it.
>
> >> >Obsessive compulsion gets people like that. Born-again christians are
> >> >a good example, tramping door-to-door peddling their nonsense and as
> >> >happy as the day is long doing it..
>
> >> Or more like trying to get on the local French council and not  making
> >> it  and now say the council is undemocratic.  Probably because they
> >> didn't want you.
>
> >Oh, they wanted me.
>
> Gosh, really.  Would the mayor confirm that?
>
> >And when did I say the council was undemocratic? I
> >said the election was undemocratic, and that was my reason for turning
> >down the mayor's offer of a place on his list.
>
> Well if the election is undemocratic and organised by the council, the
> council is undemocratic.

A non-sequitur from the master of same.

The Zimbabwe parliament just elected its speaker by a democratic
ballot organised by the Zimbabwe parliament - the process by which the
Zimbabwe parliament was elected has been decried world-wide as non-
democratic.

> >You really don't read
> >other people's post do you. I guess that's part of your being an
> >obsessive.
>
> I was recalling your past posts - not reading them at this time.

So this is your excuse for all those porky-pies you've posted over the
years - an ineffective memory.

> >> <snip>
>
> >> >> >> >> >Well you were wrong about that too. I learned to get out of a
> >> >> >> >> >synthetic chemistry laboratory as fast as possible if I wanted to live
> >> >> >> >> >to a ripe old age.
>
> >> >> >> >> So how long did it take you to learn that?
>
> >> >> >> >3 years.
>
> >> >> >> You're obviously not a fast learner.
>
> >> >> >In the 60s nobody knew what we know today. Some of my colleagues from
> >> >> >those days, who made research chemistry their career choice are dead
> >> >> >now.
>
> >> >> So you were a research chemist?  How boring.  And here's me thinking
> >> >> you were a leading edge scientist.  Were you a professor?
>
> >> >What makes you think I could achieve that after just 3 years post-
> >> >grad. Professors spend more time than that in the lab before moving
> >> >up.
>
> >> I didn't say after just three years.  So I take it you weren't a
> >> professor?  Or a mere ten a penny doctor?
>
> >Neither did you read what I wrote, it seems.
>
> So I gather you were neither.
>
> You're always going on about being a scientist.
>
> Are you ashamed to disclose what you really did?

You still haven't read what I wrote. Are you dyslexic, lack
concentration, going blind, making things up, or what?

On Aug 28, 12:01 pm, amacmil...@aol.com wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:48:09 -0700 (PDT), "John M."
>  wrote:

> >> Or more like trying to get on the local French council and not  making
> >> it  and now say the council is undemocratic.  Probably because they
> >> didn't want you.
>
> >Oh, they wanted me.
>
> Gosh, really.  Would the mayor confirm that?

Ask him: cabrespine[at]wanadoo.fr