Jim Carr wrote:
> "exp(j*pi/2)" <someone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:1168920249.766926.76780@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Obviously, ****ky Mike Rieve's can no longer keep track of his lies and
> > bull****.
> > By his own admission, ****ky Mike Rieves was 52 yeas old in October of
> > 2001.
> >
> > That would put the beginning of his miserable and pathetic existence
> > sometime in 1949, and would put him in the second grade in 1956.
>
> Sorry, I just can't resist this one.
Sorry I didn't spell it all out for you.
> I was born in 1966. My first car was a 1966 Thunderbird. Am I a liar? Am
I
> crazy? A newborn infant with a brand new car? No, you silly goose.
As usual, whenever given the choice between the sensible and the
absurd, you go for the absurd.
> I bought
> the car when I was 16. It was 20 years old and thus affordable to a
> teenager.
Sorry, but if the car you bought was made the same year you were born,
the car was not 20 years old when you were 16.
So, Mike was born in 1949. At the age of 16 (1965) he bought a
> used 1956 Belair.
Brilliant, and follows from the information I provided. The question
is what is likelihood that in 1965 a 16 year old piece of trailer-trash
had the money to buy a used 10 year old car? Perhaps the pig had a
little sister that he was pimping out whereas you didn't.
> It's not rocket science, Gary.
So why are you having such a problem with it?
|
