Goatheads for Jobst



Dear Jobst,

I thought that this post deserved its own thread.

After all, it's a lot of work to take the pictures, upload them,
provide tiny-url links for your inadequate browser, and explain the
obvious.

(Anyone not interested in dull pictures of tiny thorns that Jobst
claims aren't there in the first place and ought to be seen and dodged
in the second place should skip this.)

For the curious, here's a link to the original post:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/25c117a8192028be
or http://tinyurl.com/gks2p

But what follows is fairly clear on its own.

Sorry about the slow loading from filelodge, but filelodge offers
full-size pictures, unlike flickr. At full size, one-quarter of a
picture will fill your entire screen--modern digital cameras offer
absurd detail and enlargment.

Let's talk goatheads!

Amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:

http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/050_spot_the_goathead.jpg

"You don't find any puncture vine in this picture because the plant
does not grow amidst grass or other dense vegetation. It grows on
barren soil. If you got a goathead in your tire, it was picked up at
another location. For a convincing picture, you'll need to focus on a
plant at the edge of this weathered path that hasn't been paved in
more than ten years."

Er, the question isn't whether you can see any puncture vine handy.

The question is where is the goathead thorn that your silly FAQ claims
riders ought to be able to dodge?

There's a goathead thorn in plain sight on the path in the easily
enlarged picture. If you can't see it here, how can you claim to be
able to spot and dodge it at 20 mph on a bicycle?

And despite your silly claim, there are lots of goathead thorns along
that path.

(If you don't like "silly," stop pretending so emphatically that you
know more about where I live and ride than I do. It makes people
wonder whether your other comments are just as ignorant.)

You see, Jobst, goathead vines line the road that the path parallels.
The road is about thirty feet up the gentle slope to the right of the
path.

You can't see the vines from the path, much less in the picture.

Funny thing, plenty of thorns wind up on that quarter-mile section of
the path below the road. They're washed down the slope by the rain and
blown down by the wind.

Please, spare us any claims that this is unusual.

Anyone who complained about getting goathead thorns stuck in his
tires, his shoes, or his dog's paw just because he sees no puncture
vine within arm's-reach would be considered an idiot around Pueblo.

And what's that weird red herring about the path being weathered
and not paved for ten years? Where does your FAQ specify that your
silly claims that everyone should be able to spot and avoid goatheads
is useless except on fresh black asphalt?

Here's a two-lane 35 mph road that's part of my daily ride:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/044 spot the goathead.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/s72e8

Are you going to claim that you can spot a goathead thorn on that
surface? It's a very nice new road for my neck of the woods.

(In fact, it looks a lot like a familiar road:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg

You don't seem to be worried about goatheads in that corner, probably
because goatheads are much rarer in that area than they are where I
live.)

Even more amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:

http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/038_goatheads_in_crack.jpg

"You'll have to show me that there are puncture vine plants in the
above pictures. I see nothing of the kind. You should be aware that
these plants produce their 10mm diameter 5-petal blossoms and thorns
through their entire life. These pictures show an asphalt path with
grass and innocuous weeds."

Let me get this straight . . .

You're claiming that I'm standing there with a camera, but I can't
tell puncture vine from the grass and other weeds, even though I
explicitly stated that it was mixed in with them?

Your evidence for this astonishing denial is that you can't see
blossoms, with some twaddle about how big you think they should be?

So when I spend a few hours weeding vines along the path every year,
I'm just imagining the vines? The goathead vines can't grow mixed with
other plants because you say so? I can't recognize the puncture vines
that I pull up every day when I walk my dog around my neighborhood?

What's the weather like on your planet?

Ignoring my text, Jobst wrote about this picture:

http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/020_dock_goatheads.jpg

"You'll notice that there is no grass or other vegetation in that
patch of puncture vine and that the plant is identifiable from a
distance."

Yes, that's a nice, solid mat of goathead thorns with little flowers,
easily identifiable.

As the text made clear, that picture provides contrast to all the
other vines in all the other pictures--you know, the ones that aren't
putting out flowers at the moment and are mixed in with all the other
grass and weeds.

What you utterly fail to notice (apparently due to limited experience)
is that all the nice, clear goathead vine in that picture also extends
throughout the grass and weeds around it. Try to walk barefoot in that
grass, and you'll leave bloody footprints.

(Yes, I've walked over that innocent-looking grass beyond the obvious
mats of puncture vine to reach the pond next to the path. The wooden
fence to the left of the bike is actually the railing for a dock.)

Then you dodged wildly:

"So why do you ride there? It's like riding in a glass recycling
yard."

Er, I could claim that I ride there because some nitwit keeps
insisting in the FAQ that I can avoid running over goathead thorns by
simply keeping an eye out for them.

Or I could point out that you seem to be admitting that there are
miles and miles of bicycle paths and roads around Pueblo where your
advice is ridiculous.

But to answer the silly question about why I ride where I ride . . .

Possibly because I live here? And that's a typical path? And it's the
only game in town? A place obviously outside your experience, but
which you keep insisting can't be different than what you're familiar
with?

Around Pueblo, goatheads are just part of life. Here, thorns on the
paths and roads and sidewalks are no more unusual than getting rained
on in other places.

You'd be astonished if I insisted that there's no need for a rain
coat, wouldn't you? (I was thirty before I bought a raincoat--it makes
a nice windbreaker, but I don't get caught in the rain as often as
most people get flat tires. It's a bit dry around here.)

It astonishes people in Pueblo when I tell them that nitwits claim to
be able to avoid goatheads by keeping an eye out for them--why not
claim that you can ride between raindrops?

Besides, I like seeing the deer, antelope, foxes, badgers, coyotes,
beavers, muskrats, prairie dogs, porcupines, bobcats, snapping
turtles, softshell turtles, box turtles, rattlesnakes, garter snakes,
red racers, bullsnakes, flat-head snakes, tiger salamanders,
tarantulas, bullfrogs, leopard frogs, toads, lizards, burrowing owls,
great horned owls, flickers, woodpeckers, crows, bald eagles, hawks,
great blue herons, inland cormorants, pelicans, quail, blue pinon-tree
jays, and avocets.

I don't pay much attention to the wide variety of ducks and geese or
to the squirrels and rabbits.

I prefer to avoid the skunks without inquiring whether they're
striped, spotted, or hog-nosed, details that would be easier to notice
than a goathead thorn lying on the road.

I haven't seen black bears, mountain lions, elk, or moose on my ride.

Before you announce with great authority that moose don't wander
around on the Great Plains, I'll point out that the local paper
reported a moose that not only wandered down from the mountains, but
managed to elude the police and wildlife officers, who chased it
around Pueblo West for hours.

No one has ever reported an armadillo around Pueblo.

Now let's see some new pictures of goathead vine and thorns in a
crack, the stuff that you claim I must have been imagining when I took
the earlier pictures.

Here's a typical crack on the same path, ten paces from the camera,
about 30 feet and one second at 20 mph:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/146 goathead crack from 10 paces.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/rwcz2

Those green vines with no visible yellow flowers on both sides of the
path are, despite your claims, goatheads growing mixed in with tall
grass and other weeds.

And something green is growing in that crack--I wonder what it is?

Here's the same crack, five paces from the camera:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/147 goathead crack from 5 paces.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/lq4cs

Still awfully hard to tell if you're about to roll over goathead vine,
isn't it? No convenient yellow flowers by the side of the road, no
tiny yellow flowers in that green stuff growing in the crack.

Here's a close-up of the crack:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/148 goathead crack close up.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc

It's filled with goathead vines and crab grass and some weeds whose
names I don't know.

Sorry, it's far too late to dodge. Besides, you still can't see any
little yellow flowers, can you? Or the thorns, which have been
accumulating in the crack for years and are growing on the flowerless
vines.

Here's the same crack with the goathead vines pulled out and laid
sideways for better viewing:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/149 goathead crack close up vines pulled out.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/n3tnd

Look very carefully and you'll see the faintly yellow thorns growing
here and there along the vine.

Of course, you have to view the picture full size to see them, so it's
ridiculous to claim that you could see and avoid them on a bicycle at
20 mph--six of them will fit on the "B" of "Bell" on the helmet.

Still no yellow warning flowers.

Here's a view from the left side of the crack after the vines were
pulled out to make it plain that I literally touched them and was not
imagining them:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/152 goathead crack side view.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/ns233

That's goathead vine in the crack, growing from both sides of the
path, mixed with some crab grass and other weeds.

From this angle, you can see some of the tiny yellow flowers on the
goathead vine at the bottom of the picture--mixed in with the weeds
and grass at the side of the path and almost impossible to see in the
pictures taken from a rider's point of view.

Incidentally, the helmet was placed to make it easy to spot a large
green goathead thorn lying out on the path, away from the crack.

Can you spot it?

Do you think you could have spotted it at 20 mph?

This picture uses some leaves to show you where that big goathead is:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/153 goathead crack spot the goathead.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/m3kex

Please, let's not have any more nonsense about I-see-no-goathead-here.

If you can't spot the stuff in still pictures, you should keep quiet
and hope no one laughs at your claims to be able to spot and dodge
them on a bicycle. It makes people wonder about other things that you
insist are true.

I assume that you ride mostly on smooth, fresh, black pavement on wide
roads in places where goatheads aren't much of a problem. If you want
to congratulate yourself on "avoiding" the thorns, you're welcome to
your illusions.

But I suspect that most of your success stems from riding where there
just aren't many thorns on the pavement in the first place, not from
your keen eyesight or your evasive maneuvers.

After all, your evasive maneuvers aren't working too well here.

Here's a nice final picture of goathead vines growing out onto the
path:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/141 solid goatheads looking down.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/pvuod

You can see that the mower has just been by, flinging thorns
everywhere, but there are hardly any warning flowers--not that they'd
do much good on an 8-foot-wide path with miles and miles of goatheads
growing in the cracks and on either side, mixed in with all the other
weeds and grass.

You know, the kind of path that I ride and you don't.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel
 
Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:


[email protected] wrote:
> Dear Jobst,
>
> I thought that this post deserved its own thread.
>
> After all, it's a lot of work to take the pictures, upload them,
> provide tiny-url links for your inadequate browser, and explain the
> obvious.
>
> (Anyone not interested in dull pictures of tiny thorns that Jobst
> claims aren't there in the first place and ought to be seen and dodged
> in the second place should skip this.)
>
> For the curious, here's a link to the original post:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/25c117a8192028be
> or http://tinyurl.com/gks2p
>
> But what follows is fairly clear on its own.
>
> Sorry about the slow loading from filelodge, but filelodge offers
> full-size pictures, unlike flickr. At full size, one-quarter of a
> picture will fill your entire screen--modern digital cameras offer
> absurd detail and enlargment.
>
> Let's talk goatheads!
>
> Amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/050_spot_the_goathead.jpg
>
> "You don't find any puncture vine in this picture because the plant
> does not grow amidst grass or other dense vegetation. It grows on
> barren soil. If you got a goathead in your tire, it was picked up at
> another location. For a convincing picture, you'll need to focus on a
> plant at the edge of this weathered path that hasn't been paved in
> more than ten years."
>
> Er, the question isn't whether you can see any puncture vine handy.
>
> The question is where is the goathead thorn that your silly FAQ claims
> riders ought to be able to dodge?
>
> There's a goathead thorn in plain sight on the path in the easily
> enlarged picture. If you can't see it here, how can you claim to be
> able to spot and dodge it at 20 mph on a bicycle?
>
> And despite your silly claim, there are lots of goathead thorns along
> that path.
>
> (If you don't like "silly," stop pretending so emphatically that you
> know more about where I live and ride than I do. It makes people
> wonder whether your other comments are just as ignorant.)
>
> You see, Jobst, goathead vines line the road that the path parallels.
> The road is about thirty feet up the gentle slope to the right of the
> path.
>
> You can't see the vines from the path, much less in the picture.
>
> Funny thing, plenty of thorns wind up on that quarter-mile section of
> the path below the road. They're washed down the slope by the rain and
> blown down by the wind.
>
> Please, spare us any claims that this is unusual.
>
> Anyone who complained about getting goathead thorns stuck in his
> tires, his shoes, or his dog's paw just because he sees no puncture
> vine within arm's-reach would be considered an idiot around Pueblo.
>
> And what's that weird red herring about the path being weathered
> and not paved for ten years? Where does your FAQ specify that your
> silly claims that everyone should be able to spot and avoid goatheads
> is useless except on fresh black asphalt?
>
> Here's a two-lane 35 mph road that's part of my daily ride:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/044 spot the goathead.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/s72e8
>
> Are you going to claim that you can spot a goathead thorn on that
> surface? It's a very nice new road for my neck of the woods.
>
> (In fact, it looks a lot like a familiar road:
>
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg
>
> You don't seem to be worried about goatheads in that corner, probably
> because goatheads are much rarer in that area than they are where I
> live.)
>
> Even more amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/038_goatheads_in_crack.jpg
>
> "You'll have to show me that there are puncture vine plants in the
> above pictures. I see nothing of the kind. You should be aware that
> these plants produce their 10mm diameter 5-petal blossoms and thorns
> through their entire life. These pictures show an asphalt path with
> grass and innocuous weeds."
>
> Let me get this straight . . .
>
> You're claiming that I'm standing there with a camera, but I can't
> tell puncture vine from the grass and other weeds, even though I
> explicitly stated that it was mixed in with them?
>
> Your evidence for this astonishing denial is that you can't see
> blossoms, with some twaddle about how big you think they should be?
>
> So when I spend a few hours weeding vines along the path every year,
> I'm just imagining the vines? The goathead vines can't grow mixed with
> other plants because you say so? I can't recognize the puncture vines
> that I pull up every day when I walk my dog around my neighborhood?
>
> What's the weather like on your planet?
>
> Ignoring my text, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/020_dock_goatheads.jpg
>
> "You'll notice that there is no grass or other vegetation in that
> patch of puncture vine and that the plant is identifiable from a
> distance."
>
> Yes, that's a nice, solid mat of goathead thorns with little flowers,
> easily identifiable.
>
> As the text made clear, that picture provides contrast to all the
> other vines in all the other pictures--you know, the ones that aren't
> putting out flowers at the moment and are mixed in with all the other
> grass and weeds.
>
> What you utterly fail to notice (apparently due to limited experience)
> is that all the nice, clear goathead vine in that picture also extends
> throughout the grass and weeds around it. Try to walk barefoot in that
> grass, and you'll leave bloody footprints.
>
> (Yes, I've walked over that innocent-looking grass beyond the obvious
> mats of puncture vine to reach the pond next to the path. The wooden
> fence to the left of the bike is actually the railing for a dock.)
>
> Then you dodged wildly:
>
> "So why do you ride there? It's like riding in a glass recycling
> yard."
>
> Er, I could claim that I ride there because some nitwit keeps
> insisting in the FAQ that I can avoid running over goathead thorns by
> simply keeping an eye out for them.
>
> Or I could point out that you seem to be admitting that there are
> miles and miles of bicycle paths and roads around Pueblo where your
> advice is ridiculous.
>
> But to answer the silly question about why I ride where I ride . . .
>
> Possibly because I live here? And that's a typical path? And it's the
> only game in town? A place obviously outside your experience, but
> which you keep insisting can't be different than what you're familiar
> with?
>
> Around Pueblo, goatheads are just part of life. Here, thorns on the
> paths and roads and sidewalks are no more unusual than getting rained
> on in other places.
>
> You'd be astonished if I insisted that there's no need for a rain
> coat, wouldn't you? (I was thirty before I bought a raincoat--it makes
> a nice windbreaker, but I don't get caught in the rain as often as
> most people get flat tires. It's a bit dry around here.)
>
> It astonishes people in Pueblo when I tell them that nitwits claim to
> be able to avoid goatheads by keeping an eye out for them--why not
> claim that you can ride between raindrops?
>
> Besides, I like seeing the deer, antelope, foxes, badgers, coyotes,
> beavers, muskrats, prairie dogs, porcupines, bobcats, snapping
> turtles, softshell turtles, box turtles, rattlesnakes, garter snakes,
> red racers, bullsnakes, flat-head snakes, tiger salamanders,
> tarantulas, bullfrogs, leopard frogs, toads, lizards, burrowing owls,
> great horned owls, flickers, woodpeckers, crows, bald eagles, hawks,
> great blue herons, inland cormorants, pelicans, quail, blue pinon-tree
> jays, and avocets.
>
> I don't pay much attention to the wide variety of ducks and geese or
> to the squirrels and rabbits.
>
> I prefer to avoid the skunks without inquiring whether they're
> striped, spotted, or hog-nosed, details that would be easier to notice
> than a goathead thorn lying on the road.
>
> I haven't seen black bears, mountain lions, elk, or moose on my ride.
>
> Before you announce with great authority that moose don't wander
> around on the Great Plains, I'll point out that the local paper
> reported a moose that not only wandered down from the mountains, but
> managed to elude the police and wildlife officers, who chased it
> around Pueblo West for hours.
>
> No one has ever reported an armadillo around Pueblo.
>
> Now let's see some new pictures of goathead vine and thorns in a
> crack, the stuff that you claim I must have been imagining when I took
> the earlier pictures.
>
> Here's a typical crack on the same path, ten paces from the camera,
> about 30 feet and one second at 20 mph:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/146 goathead crack from 10 paces.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/rwcz2
>
> Those green vines with no visible yellow flowers on both sides of the
> path are, despite your claims, goatheads growing mixed in with tall
> grass and other weeds.
>
> And something green is growing in that crack--I wonder what it is?
>
> Here's the same crack, five paces from the camera:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/147 goathead crack from 5 paces.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/lq4cs
>
> Still awfully hard to tell if you're about to roll over goathead vine,
> isn't it? No convenient yellow flowers by the side of the road, no
> tiny yellow flowers in that green stuff growing in the crack.
>
> Here's a close-up of the crack:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/148 goathead crack close up.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc
>
> It's filled with goathead vines and crab grass and some weeds whose
> names I don't know.
>
> Sorry, it's far too late to dodge. Besides, you still can't see any
> little yellow flowers, can you? Or the thorns, which have been
> accumulating in the crack for years and are growing on the flowerless
> vines.
>
> Here's the same crack with the goathead vines pulled out and laid
> sideways for better viewing:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/149 goathead crack close up vines pulled out.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/n3tnd
>
> Look very carefully and you'll see the faintly yellow thorns growing
> here and there along the vine.
>
> Of course, you have to view the picture full size to see them, so it's
> ridiculous to claim that you could see and avoid them on a bicycle at
> 20 mph--six of them will fit on the "B" of "Bell" on the helmet.
>
> Still no yellow warning flowers.
>
> Here's a view from the left side of the crack after the vines were
> pulled out to make it plain that I literally touched them and was not
> imagining them:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/152 goathead crack side view.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/ns233
>
> That's goathead vine in the crack, growing from both sides of the
> path, mixed with some crab grass and other weeds.
>
> From this angle, you can see some of the tiny yellow flowers on the
> goathead vine at the bottom of the picture--mixed in with the weeds
> and grass at the side of the path and almost impossible to see in the
> pictures taken from a rider's point of view.
>
> Incidentally, the helmet was placed to make it easy to spot a large
> green goathead thorn lying out on the path, away from the crack.
>
> Can you spot it?
>
> Do you think you could have spotted it at 20 mph?
>
> This picture uses some leaves to show you where that big goathead is:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/153 goathead crack spot the goathead.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/m3kex
>
> Please, let's not have any more nonsense about I-see-no-goathead-here.
>
> If you can't spot the stuff in still pictures, you should keep quiet
> and hope no one laughs at your claims to be able to spot and dodge
> them on a bicycle. It makes people wonder about other things that you
> insist are true.
>
> I assume that you ride mostly on smooth, fresh, black pavement on wide
> roads in places where goatheads aren't much of a problem. If you want
> to congratulate yourself on "avoiding" the thorns, you're welcome to
> your illusions.
>
> But I suspect that most of your success stems from riding where there
> just aren't many thorns on the pavement in the first place, not from
> your keen eyesight or your evasive maneuvers.
>
> After all, your evasive maneuvers aren't working too well here.
>
> Here's a nice final picture of goathead vines growing out onto the
> path:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/141 solid goatheads looking down.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/pvuod
>
> You can see that the mower has just been by, flinging thorns
> everywhere, but there are hardly any warning flowers--not that they'd
> do much good on an 8-foot-wide path with miles and miles of goatheads
> growing in the cracks and on either side, mixed in with all the other
> weeds and grass.
>
> You know, the kind of path that I ride and you don't.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
 
[email protected] a écrit :
> Dear Jobst,
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
>

Congratulations on the acquisition of your new 50 pound sledge hammer.
As you have already lifted it and slammed it down, will you please keep
us up to date on its effectiveness.

Tx

--

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
-
"Our knowledge is a little island in a great ocean of non-knowledge."
- Edward O. Wilson
 
Carl Fogel writes:

> Since you're determined to claim that I can't take pictures of
> goatheads and don't recognize them when I do, I took a few more
> pictures and entertained myself with extensive commentary.


> It took so long that I put it in a whole new thread, since other
> posters sometimes enjoy pictures that appear to contradict
> well-known claims.


The pictures:

http://tinyurl.com/qdn5o
http://tinyurl.com/hzx9f

Show no puncture vine in any cracks in the road or adjacent to it.
The picture with puncture vine is clearly identifiable by the leaves
and blossoms but the cracks in the above scenes are not those in the
"new" picture. That was my point.

> Here's the new thread:


http://tinyurl.com/m5ggx

The infested crack was not in the picture in dispute:

http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc

I detect a diversion. Nowhere did I claim that puncture vine is not a
hazard to tires or that it doesn't grow next to roads... or that you
don't know how the plant looks. I described how to identify it, how
to avoid it, and how to patch tires. I wrote how to recognizing its
appearance and habitat and avoid it, things I learned from riding
experience. You might explain what in those articles is misleading
rather than imply you are a victim of false information.

If the paved path is infested with puncture vine, riding a bicycle
there is unreasonable. How it got infested is unclear, not knowing
its history of building, paving, and maintenance. You recognize the
plant so I wonder why you chose this route. There must be another way
with better pavement, one swept clean by passing auto traffic.

In any event, it is old pavement, weathered and cracked, and a menace
to bicyclists. I suggest looking into this by talking to the
legislators on the board that gave rise to its construction. I
suspect they know nothing of this. Posting pictures on wreck.bike and
giving me a hard time about it won't improve anything.

Jobst Brandt




Jobst Brandt
 
On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:


You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.

If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
missing the point on several levels.

Ron
 
RonSonic wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>
> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think
> it means.
>
> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here,
> you are missing the point on several levels.


If you look up "smarmy" in the dictionary, there's a picture of Carl right
there. Meantime...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=smarmy
 
RonSonic wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>
> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.
>
> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
> missing the point on several levels.
>
>


Try a dictionary.....IMO, Carlista's posts are generally smarmy. This
one merely exposes the hostility the smarminess is used to cover over.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
RonSonic <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>
> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think
> it means.
>
> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here,
> you are missing the point on several levels.


American Heritage Dictionary

smarm?y (smarm)

1. Hypocritically, complacently, or effusively earnest; unctuous.

It's arguable whether "smarmy" or "passive-agressive" best describes
Carl's posting style, regardless of whether he is right or wrong on this
or any other topic. At least in this new thread he sheds some of his
smarmy passive-aggressiveness and gets closer to brass tacks.
 
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> RonSonic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>>
>> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think
>> it means.
>>
>> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here,
>> you are missing the point on several levels.

>
> American Heritage Dictionary
>
> smarm?y (smarm)
>
> 1. Hypocritically, complacently, or effusively earnest; unctuous.
>
> It's arguable whether "smarmy" or "passive-agressive" best describes
> Carl's posting style, regardless of whether he is right or wrong on
> this or any other topic. At least in this new thread he sheds some
> of his smarmy passive-aggressiveness and gets closer to brass tacks.


How about "unpleasantly and excessively suave or ingratiating in manner or
speech"?

Fits like a custom Italian suit.
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Dear Jobst,
>
> I thought that this post deserved its own thread.
>
> After all, it's a lot of work to take the pictures, upload them,
> provide tiny-url links for your inadequate browser, and explain the
> obvious.
>
> (Anyone not interested in dull pictures of tiny thorns that Jobst
> claims aren't there in the first place and ought to be seen and dodged
> in the second place should skip this.)
>
> For the curious, here's a link to the original post:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/25c117a8192028be
> or http://tinyurl.com/gks2p
>
> But what follows is fairly clear on its own.
>
> Sorry about the slow loading from filelodge, but filelodge offers
> full-size pictures, unlike flickr. At full size, one-quarter of a
> picture will fill your entire screen--modern digital cameras offer
> absurd detail and enlargment.
>
> Let's talk goatheads!
>
> Amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/050_spot_the_goathead.jpg
>
> "You don't find any puncture vine in this picture because the plant
> does not grow amidst grass or other dense vegetation. It grows on
> barren soil. If you got a goathead in your tire, it was picked up at
> another location. For a convincing picture, you'll need to focus on a
> plant at the edge of this weathered path that hasn't been paved in
> more than ten years."
>
> Er, the question isn't whether you can see any puncture vine handy.
>
> The question is where is the goathead thorn that your silly FAQ claims
> riders ought to be able to dodge?
>
> There's a goathead thorn in plain sight on the path in the easily
> enlarged picture. If you can't see it here, how can you claim to be
> able to spot and dodge it at 20 mph on a bicycle?
>
> And despite your silly claim, there are lots of goathead thorns along
> that path.
>
> (If you don't like "silly," stop pretending so emphatically that you
> know more about where I live and ride than I do. It makes people
> wonder whether your other comments are just as ignorant.)
>
> You see, Jobst, goathead vines line the road that the path parallels.
> The road is about thirty feet up the gentle slope to the right of the
> path.
>
> You can't see the vines from the path, much less in the picture.
>
> Funny thing, plenty of thorns wind up on that quarter-mile section of
> the path below the road. They're washed down the slope by the rain and
> blown down by the wind.
>
> Please, spare us any claims that this is unusual.
>
> Anyone who complained about getting goathead thorns stuck in his
> tires, his shoes, or his dog's paw just because he sees no puncture
> vine within arm's-reach would be considered an idiot around Pueblo.
>
> And what's that weird red herring about the path being weathered
> and not paved for ten years? Where does your FAQ specify that your
> silly claims that everyone should be able to spot and avoid goatheads
> is useless except on fresh black asphalt?
>
> Here's a two-lane 35 mph road that's part of my daily ride:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/044 spot the goathead.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/s72e8
>
> Are you going to claim that you can spot a goathead thorn on that
> surface? It's a very nice new road for my neck of the woods.
>
> (In fact, it looks a lot like a familiar road:
>
> http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/images/tiretest.jpg
>
> You don't seem to be worried about goatheads in that corner, probably
> because goatheads are much rarer in that area than they are where I
> live.)
>
> Even more amazingly, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/038_goatheads_in_crack.jpg
>
> "You'll have to show me that there are puncture vine plants in the
> above pictures. I see nothing of the kind. You should be aware that
> these plants produce their 10mm diameter 5-petal blossoms and thorns
> through their entire life. These pictures show an asphalt path with
> grass and innocuous weeds."
>
> Let me get this straight . . .
>
> You're claiming that I'm standing there with a camera, but I can't
> tell puncture vine from the grass and other weeds, even though I
> explicitly stated that it was mixed in with them?
>
> Your evidence for this astonishing denial is that you can't see
> blossoms, with some twaddle about how big you think they should be?
>
> So when I spend a few hours weeding vines along the path every year,
> I'm just imagining the vines? The goathead vines can't grow mixed with
> other plants because you say so? I can't recognize the puncture vines
> that I pull up every day when I walk my dog around my neighborhood?
>
> What's the weather like on your planet?
>
> Ignoring my text, Jobst wrote about this picture:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~carlfogel/download/020_dock_goatheads.jpg
>
> "You'll notice that there is no grass or other vegetation in that
> patch of puncture vine and that the plant is identifiable from a
> distance."
>
> Yes, that's a nice, solid mat of goathead thorns with little flowers,
> easily identifiable.
>
> As the text made clear, that picture provides contrast to all the
> other vines in all the other pictures--you know, the ones that aren't
> putting out flowers at the moment and are mixed in with all the other
> grass and weeds.
>
> What you utterly fail to notice (apparently due to limited experience)
> is that all the nice, clear goathead vine in that picture also extends
> throughout the grass and weeds around it. Try to walk barefoot in that
> grass, and you'll leave bloody footprints.
>
> (Yes, I've walked over that innocent-looking grass beyond the obvious
> mats of puncture vine to reach the pond next to the path. The wooden
> fence to the left of the bike is actually the railing for a dock.)
>
> Then you dodged wildly:
>
> "So why do you ride there? It's like riding in a glass recycling
> yard."
>
> Er, I could claim that I ride there because some nitwit keeps
> insisting in the FAQ that I can avoid running over goathead thorns by
> simply keeping an eye out for them.
>
> Or I could point out that you seem to be admitting that there are
> miles and miles of bicycle paths and roads around Pueblo where your
> advice is ridiculous.
>
> But to answer the silly question about why I ride where I ride . . .
>
> Possibly because I live here? And that's a typical path? And it's the
> only game in town? A place obviously outside your experience, but
> which you keep insisting can't be different than what you're familiar
> with?
>
> Around Pueblo, goatheads are just part of life. Here, thorns on the
> paths and roads and sidewalks are no more unusual than getting rained
> on in other places.
>
> You'd be astonished if I insisted that there's no need for a rain
> coat, wouldn't you? (I was thirty before I bought a raincoat--it makes
> a nice windbreaker, but I don't get caught in the rain as often as
> most people get flat tires. It's a bit dry around here.)
>
> It astonishes people in Pueblo when I tell them that nitwits claim to
> be able to avoid goatheads by keeping an eye out for them--why not
> claim that you can ride between raindrops?
>
> Besides, I like seeing the deer, antelope, foxes, badgers, coyotes,
> beavers, muskrats, prairie dogs, porcupines, bobcats, snapping
> turtles, softshell turtles, box turtles, rattlesnakes, garter snakes,
> red racers, bullsnakes, flat-head snakes, tiger salamanders,
> tarantulas, bullfrogs, leopard frogs, toads, lizards, burrowing owls,
> great horned owls, flickers, woodpeckers, crows, bald eagles, hawks,
> great blue herons, inland cormorants, pelicans, quail, blue pinon-tree
> jays, and avocets.
>
> I don't pay much attention to the wide variety of ducks and geese or
> to the squirrels and rabbits.
>
> I prefer to avoid the skunks without inquiring whether they're
> striped, spotted, or hog-nosed, details that would be easier to notice
> than a goathead thorn lying on the road.
>
> I haven't seen black bears, mountain lions, elk, or moose on my ride.
>
> Before you announce with great authority that moose don't wander
> around on the Great Plains, I'll point out that the local paper
> reported a moose that not only wandered down from the mountains, but
> managed to elude the police and wildlife officers, who chased it
> around Pueblo West for hours.
>
> No one has ever reported an armadillo around Pueblo.
>
> Now let's see some new pictures of goathead vine and thorns in a
> crack, the stuff that you claim I must have been imagining when I took
> the earlier pictures.
>
> Here's a typical crack on the same path, ten paces from the camera,
> about 30 feet and one second at 20 mph:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/146 goathead crack from 10 paces.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/rwcz2
>
> Those green vines with no visible yellow flowers on both sides of the
> path are, despite your claims, goatheads growing mixed in with tall
> grass and other weeds.
>
> And something green is growing in that crack--I wonder what it is?
>
> Here's the same crack, five paces from the camera:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/147 goathead crack from 5 paces.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/lq4cs
>
> Still awfully hard to tell if you're about to roll over goathead vine,
> isn't it? No convenient yellow flowers by the side of the road, no
> tiny yellow flowers in that green stuff growing in the crack.
>
> Here's a close-up of the crack:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/148 goathead crack close up.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc
>
> It's filled with goathead vines and crab grass and some weeds whose
> names I don't know.
>
> Sorry, it's far too late to dodge. Besides, you still can't see any
> little yellow flowers, can you? Or the thorns, which have been
> accumulating in the crack for years and are growing on the flowerless
> vines.
>
> Here's the same crack with the goathead vines pulled out and laid
> sideways for better viewing:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/149 goathead crack close up vines pulled out.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/n3tnd
>
> Look very carefully and you'll see the faintly yellow thorns growing
> here and there along the vine.
>
> Of course, you have to view the picture full size to see them, so it's
> ridiculous to claim that you could see and avoid them on a bicycle at
> 20 mph--six of them will fit on the "B" of "Bell" on the helmet.
>
> Still no yellow warning flowers.
>
> Here's a view from the left side of the crack after the vines were
> pulled out to make it plain that I literally touched them and was not
> imagining them:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/152 goathead crack side view.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/ns233
>
> That's goathead vine in the crack, growing from both sides of the
> path, mixed with some crab grass and other weeds.
>
> From this angle, you can see some of the tiny yellow flowers on the
> goathead vine at the bottom of the picture--mixed in with the weeds
> and grass at the side of the path and almost impossible to see in the
> pictures taken from a rider's point of view.
>
> Incidentally, the helmet was placed to make it easy to spot a large
> green goathead thorn lying out on the path, away from the crack.
>
> Can you spot it?
>
> Do you think you could have spotted it at 20 mph?
>
> This picture uses some leaves to show you where that big goathead is:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/153 goathead crack spot the goathead.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/m3kex
>
> Please, let's not have any more nonsense about I-see-no-goathead-here.
>
> If you can't spot the stuff in still pictures, you should keep quiet
> and hope no one laughs at your claims to be able to spot and dodge
> them on a bicycle. It makes people wonder about other things that you
> insist are true.
>
> I assume that you ride mostly on smooth, fresh, black pavement on wide
> roads in places where goatheads aren't much of a problem. If you want
> to congratulate yourself on "avoiding" the thorns, you're welcome to
> your illusions.
>
> But I suspect that most of your success stems from riding where there
> just aren't many thorns on the pavement in the first place, not from
> your keen eyesight or your evasive maneuvers.
>
> After all, your evasive maneuvers aren't working too well here.
>
> Here's a nice final picture of goathead vines growing out onto the
> path:
>
> http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/141 solid goatheads looking down.jpg
> or http://tinyurl.com/pvuod
>
> You can see that the mower has just been by, flinging thorns
> everywhere, but there are hardly any warning flowers--not that they'd
> do much good on an 8-foot-wide path with miles and miles of goatheads
> growing in the cracks and on either side, mixed in with all the other
> weeds and grass.
>
> You know, the kind of path that I ride and you don't.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel


Not to worry, if you have enough time to write posts of this size and
complexity, you have enough time to fix flats.

Chris
 
RonSonic wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>
> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.
>
> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
> missing the point on several levels.
>



Enlighten us all, please, Ron.
 
On 2 Sep 2006 18:37:18 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>RonSonic wrote:
>> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>>
>> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.
>>
>> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
>> missing the point on several levels.
>>

>
>
>Enlighten us all, please, Ron.


Irony.

Ron
 
On 2 Sep 2006 13:15:35 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>> Carl Fogel

>
>wow, how much time did you spend on conceptualiztion, research,
>proofreading etc your post?


Dear R.,

Alas, if you think that I proofread without pay, you're not reading my
posts carefully enough.

Conceptualization took about five seconds, tops--I've been getting
goathead flats for years.

(How long would it take you to "conceptualize" a post arguing that I
was wrong and that raincoats are actually useful in some places?)

Research consisted of pointing a camera at a few spots on my daily
ride, which I'm doing anyway for an unrelated legal matter. As you can
see, any fool can point a modern digital camera and push the button.
Even middle-of-the-road models like mine provide incredible detail to
make up for the lack of artistry.

Out of 156 pictures so far, only one is bad in the sense of being
blurry. Here it is:

http://www.filelodge.com/files/room19/497501/081 curve bad focus.jpg
or http://tinyurl.com/zlq7j

As far as I can tell, absolutely everything is out of focus, but it
could just be jiggle blurring everything. It's hard to blame a camera
that lets a rank amateur take so many other pictures so easily.

It was also an easy way to look into the differences between Flickr
and FileLodge. Flicker is faster, but reduces the pictures, so it's
not as good as FileLodge, which is slower, but gives the full-size
images often needed on RBT. Again, a quarter of the full-size picture
should fill a typical monitor's screen.

As for the rest of the time spent on such things, I type fast,
in-between other computer chores.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel
 
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 18:09:30 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> RonSonic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:

>>
>> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think
>> it means.
>>
>> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here,
>> you are missing the point on several levels.

>
>American Heritage Dictionary
>
>smarm?y (smarm)
>
> 1. Hypocritically, complacently, or effusively earnest; unctuous.
>
>It's arguable whether "smarmy" or "passive-agressive" best describes
>Carl's posting style, regardless of whether he is right or wrong on this
>or any other topic. At least in this new thread he sheds some of his
>smarmy passive-aggressiveness and gets closer to brass tacks.


Dear Tim,

Actually, they're goatheads, not brass tacks.

Passive-aggressively,

Carl Fogel
 
RonSonic wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2006 18:37:18 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >RonSonic wrote:
> >> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>
> >> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:
> >>
> >> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.
> >>
> >> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
> >> missing the point on several levels.
> >>

> >
> >
> >Enlighten us all, please, Ron.

>
> Irony.
>
>


IYO.

And , perhaps, that word doesn't mean what you think it means.


IMO, Carlista is smarmy/passive agressive.
 
On 02 Sep 2006 22:00:29 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>Carl Fogel writes:
>
>> Since you're determined to claim that I can't take pictures of
>> goatheads and don't recognize them when I do, I took a few more
>> pictures and entertained myself with extensive commentary.

>
>> It took so long that I put it in a whole new thread, since other
>> posters sometimes enjoy pictures that appear to contradict
>> well-known claims.

>
>The pictures:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/qdn5o
>http://tinyurl.com/hzx9f
>
>Show no puncture vine in any cracks in the road or adjacent to it.
>The picture with puncture vine is clearly identifiable by the leaves
>and blossoms but the cracks in the above scenes are not those in the
>"new" picture. That was my point.
>
>> Here's the new thread:

>
> http://tinyurl.com/m5ggx
>
>The infested crack was not in the picture in dispute:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc
>
>I detect a diversion. Nowhere did I claim that puncture vine is not a
>hazard to tires or that it doesn't grow next to roads... or that you
>don't know how the plant looks. I described how to identify it, how
>to avoid it, and how to patch tires. I wrote how to recognizing its
>appearance and habitat and avoid it, things I learned from riding
>experience. You might explain what in those articles is misleading
>rather than imply you are a victim of false information.
>
>If the paved path is infested with puncture vine, riding a bicycle
>there is unreasonable. How it got infested is unclear, not knowing
>its history of building, paving, and maintenance. You recognize the
>plant so I wonder why you chose this route. There must be another way
>with better pavement, one swept clean by passing auto traffic.
>
>In any event, it is old pavement, weathered and cracked, and a menace
>to bicyclists. I suggest looking into this by talking to the
>legislators on the board that gave rise to its construction. I
>suspect they know nothing of this. Posting pictures on wreck.bike and
>giving me a hard time about it won't improve anything.
>
>Jobst Brandt


Dear Jobst,

Ah, the wriggling repeated from the other thread!

Same diversion about how the path ought to be fixed up to suit your
goathead theories--it's just unreasonable for me to have put in
100,000 miles on that kind of stuff in the last 20 years!

New pretence that you weren't claiming that the previous pictures
showed anything of the kind, how dreadfully you're misunderstood.

Typical bland nonsense about how things haven't been repeatedly
explained.

It's modest fun, seeing how many of us can dance on a goathead.

So far, no one seems to be claiming that riders ought to be able to
spot and avoid the stuff in my numerous pictures. It's almost as if
your FAQ doesn't apply except to your apparently narrow experience.

Since you've been pulling this trick for years, with me and with other
posters, it seemed like a nice way to use the new camera.

Somehow, I doubt that I'll have to read any modest new posts from you
about how the people who run over goatheads are the same people who
don't see coins and tools on the trail.

If I do, I'll just repost a link or two to these pictures and ask when
you plan to use a paint program to circle the goathead thorn that
you'd be approaching at 20 mph.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel
 
The little a**hole sheds the cloak of smarm and gets right down to it:


[email protected] wrote:
> On 02 Sep 2006 22:00:29 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Carl Fogel writes:
> >
> >> Since you're determined to claim that I can't take pictures of
> >> goatheads and don't recognize them when I do, I took a few more
> >> pictures and entertained myself with extensive commentary.

> >
> >> It took so long that I put it in a whole new thread, since other
> >> posters sometimes enjoy pictures that appear to contradict
> >> well-known claims.

> >
> >The pictures:
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/qdn5o
> >http://tinyurl.com/hzx9f
> >
> >Show no puncture vine in any cracks in the road or adjacent to it.
> >The picture with puncture vine is clearly identifiable by the leaves
> >and blossoms but the cracks in the above scenes are not those in the
> >"new" picture. That was my point.
> >
> >> Here's the new thread:

> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/m5ggx
> >
> >The infested crack was not in the picture in dispute:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/m7nrc
> >
> >I detect a diversion. Nowhere did I claim that puncture vine is not a
> >hazard to tires or that it doesn't grow next to roads... or that you
> >don't know how the plant looks. I described how to identify it, how
> >to avoid it, and how to patch tires. I wrote how to recognizing its
> >appearance and habitat and avoid it, things I learned from riding
> >experience. You might explain what in those articles is misleading
> >rather than imply you are a victim of false information.
> >
> >If the paved path is infested with puncture vine, riding a bicycle
> >there is unreasonable. How it got infested is unclear, not knowing
> >its history of building, paving, and maintenance. You recognize the
> >plant so I wonder why you chose this route. There must be another way
> >with better pavement, one swept clean by passing auto traffic.
> >
> >In any event, it is old pavement, weathered and cracked, and a menace
> >to bicyclists. I suggest looking into this by talking to the
> >legislators on the board that gave rise to its construction. I
> >suspect they know nothing of this. Posting pictures on wreck.bike and
> >giving me a hard time about it won't improve anything.
> >
> >Jobst Brandt

>
> Dear Jobst,
>
> Ah, the wriggling repeated from the other thread!
>
> Same diversion about how the path ought to be fixed up to suit your
> goathead theories--it's just unreasonable for me to have put in
> 100,000 miles on that kind of stuff in the last 20 years!
>
> New pretence that you weren't claiming that the previous pictures
> showed anything of the kind, how dreadfully you're misunderstood.
>
> Typical bland nonsense about how things haven't been repeatedly
> explained.
>
> It's modest fun, seeing how many of us can dance on a goathead.
>
> So far, no one seems to be claiming that riders ought to be able to
> spot and avoid the stuff in my numerous pictures. It's almost as if
> your FAQ doesn't apply except to your apparently narrow experience.
>
> Since you've been pulling this trick for years, with me and with other
> posters, it seemed like a nice way to use the new camera.
>
> Somehow, I doubt that I'll have to read any modest new posts from you
> about how the people who run over goatheads are the same people who
> don't see coins and tools on the trail.
>
> If I do, I'll just repost a link or two to these pictures and ask when
> you plan to use a paint program to circle the goathead thorn that
> you'd be approaching at 20 mph.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel













How's "Peggy" the Inflatable Doll?
 
Do you have something to add to the discussion or do you just run around
calling people names?
 
On 2 Sep 2006 19:05:33 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>RonSonic wrote:
>> On 2 Sep 2006 18:37:18 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >RonSonic wrote:
>> >> On 2 Sep 2006 13:55:10 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Look! A smarmy toad has gone over the edge:
>> >>
>> >> You keep using that word, but I think it does not mean what you think it means.
>> >>
>> >> If you think "smarmy" has anything to do with Carl's writings here, you are
>> >> missing the point on several levels.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >Enlighten us all, please, Ron.

>>
>> Irony.
>>
>>

>
>IYO.
>
>And , perhaps, that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
>
>
>IMO, Carlista is smarmy/passive agressive.


It's Certain he's smarter than you.

Ron