It has NOTHING to do whether Umesh's view of delivery
truck doing about turn is correct .
It is about YOUR about turn --
1) YOU ascribed the Wiki info on some Desi
2) YOU mentioned that the site Umesh refered to is
"Yet another PSEUDO scientific account"
3) When pointed out that is the same info as published
by LoC, YOU said it is garbage
4) When pointed that it is published by Fed Research,
YOU did an about turn --- the info is correct
comprehension is wrong ..... then WHY not spell it
out in first place and WHY ascribe the Wiki content on
some hapless Desi ??
Huh ... thumping chest even when the twists and about
turns are staring on yor face.
>>If so what kind of support are you receiving from
>>your fan-mail in
>>assamnet? And if the fans are not responding ,
>>have you considered
>>conducting a poll on it ?
I have my own fan following but do not want to give
you a heart burn.
It is better not to go for a poll. When the results go
against you, you will start calling it a farce (just
the way some newspaper published a false report on PCG
polls :-) )
>>And from reading the material you put forth, is it
>>your considered
>>opinion that Umesh's reading of it
>>in line of the delivery truck doing an about turn
>>was the correct
>>conclusion ?
>>If so what kind of support are you receiving from
>>your fan-mail in
>>assamnet? And if the fans are not responding ,
>>have you considered
>>conducting a poll on it ?
t 12:41 PM -0700 10/18/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty
wrote:
>The material, including your various moving
arguments,
>are already in this forum. Netters are very well
>aware how the arguments shifted ... not for the first
>time though
>
>
>Next time, before ascribing something on "Desi School
>sporting the name of some Christian saint" just
check
>your backyard. May be the author of Wiki is one of
>your home grown expert researcher !
>
>
>
>>>*** Unless you give them the material under
>>>contention how do you
>>>expect them to judge it?
>
>>>Sheeesh!
>
>
>
>At 12:01 PM -0700 10/18/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty
>wrote:
>>Hope some enlightened netter who understand ordinary
>>english can explain me which of your argument is
true
>>--
>>
>>1) The Fed Research site is PSEUDO scientific
>>OR
>>2) Fed Research publishes unadulterated garbage
>>OR
>>3) Fed research materials are correct but we are
>>unable to comprehend it.
>>OR
>>All three above
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>OR May be
>>The Fed research experts graduated from a Desi
School
>>sporting the name of some Christian saint
>>
>>
>>
>>>>My heart goes out for you.
>>
>>>>But if you don't agree with what I wrote you can
>>>>pull the material
>>>>together and present it to netters. Most of us
>>>>understand ordinary
>>>>English here.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>At 11:27 AM -0700 10/18/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty
>>wrote:
>>>All three are your arguments so how can we,
>>>half-brained and what not folks figure out what you
>>>are trying to say ... it is too difficult to
>>>understand such high level moving arguments.
>>>
>>>I am yet to recover from shock how infalliable
>BiDesi
>>>experts wrote same piece like a Desi who graduated
>>>from a school/college sporting the name of some
>>>Christian saint
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Why don't you tell us which?
>>>
>>>>>Are you not upto it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>At 10:57 AM -0700 10/18/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty
>>>wrote:
>>>> >But the problem is NOT what the book may
>>contain,
>>>it
>>>>is the
>>>>COMPREHENSION of it.
>>>>
>>>>>I will bet a dollar that the report did not imply
>(
>>>>>to anyone who
>>>>>reads and comprehends ordinary English)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hmmm .... a different argument then "Yet another
>>>>PSEUDO scientific account" OR "unadulterated
>>>>garbage".
>>>>
>>>>With such rapid shift in arguments, we, the
>>>>half-brained, dimwits are confused what is true --
>>>>
>>>>1) The Fed Research site is PSEUDO scientific
>>>>OR
>>>>2) Fed Research publishes unadulterated garbage
>>>>OR
>>>>3) Fed research materials are correct but we are
>>>>unable to comprehend it.
>>>>OR
>>>>All three above
>>>>
>>>>> >If the piece of info is garbage (indicates
>>there
>>>>may
>>>>>be more garbage) , it implies that ---
>>>>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
