HPF
09-11-2003, 01:00 AM
Dear "blah",<br>Nice adjective, there, Professor; you must have been mulling over that one for quite some time; it really helped strengthen your argument, which you probably thought was witty, insightful, and penetrating.<br>Wrong! <br>What zoo do you live in? I want to visit, so I can point you out to children and tell them, "Millions of years ago, children, humans were at the same stage of intellectual development as old Timmy over there". You do know that scientists are working with chimpanzees that have a better grasp of the English language than you have, don't you?<br>Don't you have any pride? Why do you want to expose yourself to the world as the complete dimwit you undoubtedly are? You can't even form a proper sentence and you spell like a retard. What makes you think you have any competency to be able to critique a well recognised masterpiece of literature? You can't even write proper English let alone critique it. I mean, "it does have some good parts but so does shooting yourself in the foot". Ah, run that one by me again, please? That was your argument? That's the best you could do? What a prat! Are you really so stupid that you think Melville would lose his train of thought? And even in that statement you made your sentence structure was shockingly bad!<br>If the book is too much for you, put it down, and tell your teacher you want to play in the field with the other animals. I understand that "Timmy" is a name many people give their dog, so you might be used to doing this already. Then, shoot yourself in the foot (or paw, whichever it is for you) as you described in your message and write back informing me exactly of those "good parts" inherent in the exercise. I'm sure we'd all like to know. <br>Then, get lost, and find another website where low-IQ morons like yourself are welcomed. www.crufts.org.uk might be a good one, Timmy--maybe you could send them a picture of your nice shiny coat your master has brushed for you!