Whenever I think of Australopithecus I'm reminded how the founder of Lucy claimed in his book that he had infact been scouting in native human burial grounds one night to get a human pelvis. It therefore doesn't seem out of place for Johansen to fabricate a hoax.

You have made that claim before, but again you have never supported this lie. Johansen did not fabricate a hoax. Provide evidence of your claim, or be once again shown to be a liar.

If I can prove that Johansen went around in burial grounds at night to look for a human pelvis would you pay me $150?

I bet you $150 that I can prove it to you.

Pay up or..... OK. I'll be nice and not finish that phrase.

Why not just support your claims so that people don't think you are a liar?

Because I have to go to the library again.

I'll take you up on that bet, but I'll hold you to exactly what you state above.

This is dangerously close to libel, bucko. Got any evidence of your assertions about Johanson besides your ignorance?

You might be surprised! Grin. Do you want to bet $150 buckaroos on it?

I do. Why don't you reply to me? Or did you miss this posting?

Be completely clear on the terms of your claim when dealing with a low down disgraceful sonofabitch like nameless.

Read what he said above. He does not actually claim that Lucy's pelvis was found in some cemetary. There is a vague reference to looking for a human pelvis... it is not impossible that Johanson at one time tried to find a real human pelvis for some reason, and sought same in a location where human remains were known to be buried. Of course, that is not how Lucy's pelvis was found.

Lucy's pelvis was found crushed and incomplete; and required some substantial reconstruction.

It may not have been Lucy's pelvis. And like I said, Johansen did go scouting around some burial grounds looking for a human pelvis. The fraud that he is.

Replying to gen2rev You really want to go through with this?

I think you better, Mr. McCoy. If you have even the smallest amount of honor left, then I think it is important that you back up your claims.

Are you really sure that you want me to go through with this?

If you can demonstrate that Johanson went to a burial ground at night to look for a human pelvis, I'll pay you $150. However, if you can't demonstrate this exact claim, you will pay $150 to whomever I choose.

Now, I fully expect that when you can't demonstrate this exact claim, you'll whine, twist in the wind, and try to change the terms. That won't change the fact that you were mistaken, it won't free you from your side of the bet, and I won't let you get away with it. But hopefully it will teach you a lesson.

You've got a week.

Here's the catch. One week. I don't even know what the schedule for work is for next week, and can I get there right now? Doesn't look like it.

I'd like a reasonable time frame. What about two weeks?

Google groups search for author "J McCoy" from April 9-11, 2003

Ever read the book "Lucy, the Beginnings of Humankind"? It's been several years since I peered into this interesting book. This book about some kid who was low on funds, declared a his hominid finding to the press, on the spot.

Take a gander at this.

Page 156:

Page 158

Page 159 of the sneaky man's book

Thus, the end of the story, and this isn't a great surmization on any part, some human bones got jumbled into the A-pithecus bones and voila, Lucy was born.

Yes, while listening to a Beetle's song, they decided to call it Lucy.

Page 155

You mean the ones you've gotten from the burial grounds? Are you going to enter the Arlington Memorial too?

Public Notice: Paleontologist may enter your family's burial grounds without respect to your persons. Beware. Do not trust Donald Johanson.

Compare these excerpts in context.

Note that it was a femur, not a pelvis. You owe me $150.

[Note: Turn off your Irony Meters]

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

I'd like to donate the money to the Talk.Origins Archive. Who should McCoy make the check out to?

Some on this newsgroup claimed that I was lying about Johanson sneaking out to the burial grounds. Low and behold, who's eating crow now?

McCoy wants us to be upset that Donald Johanson took some bones out of a burial chamber? Why? I'm descended from the people of the Wessex Culture; what do you think my people did with the bones of their ancestors anyhow? Buried them so they could rot?

You should be upset that he took some bones out of a burial chamber. That burial was of the Afar people. He disregarded them because they lived in far more primitive conditions than people in the US and other European countries. He violated their sacred space and remember how American Indians have gotten hostile over their burial lands to this day. What he did was WRONG and would be illegal in any country. He knew it and he was wrong. He took a human pelvis and put it with the A-pithecus. That's the only thing that you could surmise from this unethical man.

Femur! It's a FEMUR! And you owe me $150.

... When are you going to admit that you were wrong, and pay me the money you lost in our bet?

Oldridge, are you a man or a mouse? You really should own up to the fact that you got conned by a cleaver man. And secondly, demonstrate your manhood by admitting that you were wrong. You said that Johanson did not sneak around a burial ground.

I know, it;s difficult to accept having been thwarted by a creationists, for the umpteenth time, but once again, accept it. Get away from the sloganeering: "liar,liar," and be man.

McCoy, are you a man or a mouse? You really should own up to the fact that you lost our bet. And secondly, demonstrate your manhood by admitting that you were wrong. You said that Johanson took a pelvis from a burial ground.

I know, it's difficult to accept having been thwarted by an evolutionist, for the umpteenth time, but once again, accept it. Get away from the sloganeering, and be man. Pay me the $150 you owe me.

As for you claims about Johanson, your claim was only partally correct. Your claim was Johanson snuck into a burial ground, to get a pelvis, which he, you implied used in the "Lucy" specimen. The story, as related by Johanson, was that he needed a human femur to compare with a fossilized knee joint he found (This was a full year before "Lucy"), This was necessary for him to determine that the fossil was a hominid, which required different handling with the authorities than other fossils. Johanson didn't raid a burial ground, but a single grave mound. Johanson never tried to pass that recovered bone off as a fossil find. Granted that he should not have disturbed a grave site, but your other claims are entirely false.

You are still the one dining on Crow. Johanson didn't do what you claimed he did. He did vist a single grave, and took a single bone, for comparison purposes only.

He wasn't digging up multiple graves, and he wasn't faking fossils. He didn't take a pelvis, and he didn't fake the "Lucy" fossil. What ever creationist source you got that claim from was incorrect. You still owe gen2rev $150. When will you pay up?

Actually, it was this femur that I had in fact ment to mention. It's been a long time since I've read that book. But the fact is that Johanson snuck around a burial ground at night against American Indians who didn't want their sacred ground violated and a Kansas cemetary caretaker who was shocked to know that it happened. A little humor to drive a point threw. The fact is Dana, read Johanson's account of the Piltdown hoax, then read the ending portion of his second book on the daughter of Lucy. Put two and two together and what you've really got is a man who hoaxed the world. I'm sorry, he may be your hero, but he sure got away with a lot of money for his scam.

Remember, he said that it's natural to be deceitful. All nature does it so he did it too.

Man at a local market: "I see you're looking for a job?"

Donald Johanson : "Yes. You have my resume."

Man: "What this part about?"

Donald Johanson: "You mean right.."

Man: "There..."

Donald Johanson: "Oh, yes, where I wrote..."

Man: "I snook out on a night excursion to a local burial ground and stole a femur...."

Donald Johanson: "I wrote that. It proves that I'm honest. I wrote it. I get a job right?"

Man: Wrong. Like you think I'm going to believe you? You really want a job where thousands of items may be stolen from you?

Donald Johanson: "Uh,uh,uh..."

Man: Like you tried to make an excuse to your crew as to why you were out there. It's quite apparent as to what you've done. You even wrote here on your resume that:

Donald Johanson: "Where I reference Machiavelli and talk about how it's natural to deceive? And how I talk about the benefits of what I've done - the end justifies the means?"

Man: And you want me to trust you?

Donald Johanson: I need the money.

Man: You bet you do. You needed it so badly that you've fabricated evidence.

Donald Johanson: I wrote two books, lots of interviews.

Thus spake Johanson.

Congrats Johanson. You can make more money if you came out with a book as to how you've pulled off your hoax. I would purchase several copies and get your autograph. I want to shake your hand too. You're not that bad of a person. You've got a great sense of humor. I love this stuff!

Yeah, it was a femur! When are you going to pay me the $150 you owe me? Or are you as dishonest as you claim Johanson is?

Sometimes an argument the size of the Rock of Gibraltar appears on the horizon and instead of attacking the Rock, evolutionists on talk.origins will resort to bringing up alternative reasons for debunking the creationists.

Let me show you a couple of nasty Rock of Gibraltars that have appeared recently.

It turns out, yes, it's true that Donald Johanson, creator of Lucy, did in fact sneak out to a burial ground at night, to obtain a human femur.

You said it was a pelvis, and chimp at that. Make up your mind. Or are you accepting you can be wrong? In which case check the sources more carefully.

What difference does it make. I said I was wrong. It doesn't take away from the fact that Johanson snuck out at night to obtain a femur. I cited the source to prove it. So in the spirit of the point I had been making, it turned out I was right after all.

Me, I'm just a creationist who read that account years ago, and remembered that it was something human that Johanson stole. For all you know, I don't exist. I don't need a badge or a reward. Now, evolutionism, and what Johanson took away from it, why, that's important.

What I write, here, on talk.origins isn't my thesis and it's layed back as far as I'm concerned. You'd think that there would be more people visiting this newsgroup so maybe I'm just wasting my time. Hardly any creationists here.

And you're still avoiding the rock of Gibraltor.

So when you rely on decade-old imperfect memories and get something completely bass-ackwards, you think no one should correct you?

Then, in the face of absolute proof that you were wrong, you still maintain your position, until even you realize it is completely untenable, and you expect people to respect your position?

I EXPECT you to correct me. ... Everything I post here is in the crude. It could be off the top of my head or whatever. I consider talk.origins as a place where ideas get sifted and looked at. I expect it to go through refiner's fire. I make no claims that anything that I post here is perfect. In fact, it's just the opposite. I expect you to dig in and tear everything apart, the best that you can do. If anything survives I use that for my official statement and for official publication. If you think that this talk.origin site, or any other site amounts to a hill of beans, you're kidding. The people that post here are the same people who have been around for quite awhile. There's very few creationists who visit. I don't believe that I can change any of your minds. Newsgroups are testing grounds that sort through and refine information. You don't publish your thesis here. I don't have to worry about making grammatical errors, here, and I don't always publish my final and absolute concrete thoughts here. These are testing grounds. I take my official statements elsewhere. For example, after this flack over femurs and pelvises I took my official statement with the correction made with femurs and posted it to another group.

Portions of it were untenable, but the rest has survived. Sneaking survived and so did the human femur.

I don't expect anyone here to respect my position. I only expect that you tear everything apart and help me formulate my official position.

If that's the case, then why did you bet $150 on an idea that was "in the crude"? I'll tell you why, it's because you didn't think it was "in the crude" at all.

So you admit that your claim that Johanson stole a pelvis is untenable. Then pay me the money you owe me.

Gee, maybe you should go to the library more often rather than rely on us to point out that you don't know what you're talking about.

You are correct. I did believe that a pelvis was there. But I knew I was right that something human was there for absolute certain.

It was a femur and I believe that the significance is the same. It doesn't matter, you know it. The fact of the matter you, in reality, did not believe that Johanson went to a human burial ground. Be honest with me. You didn't think he did it. Come on. Tell the truth. Would you swear to it?

By the way, Johanson snuck out to a cemetary and stole a femur.

But our bet wasn't that Johanson took "something human", it was that he took a pelvis. You've admitted that you were wrong, but for some reason you don't have the scruples to follow through and pay me the money you lost.

The moral of the story is: don't make claims off the top of your head.

The "significance" is that you bet money that it was a pelvis.

It does indeed matter, because you bet money on it. And just like I predicted you're trying to weasel out of it, and change the terms after the fact.

Of course I would! Why wouldn't I? Johanson himself admits it! And as Chris Ho-Stuart has pointed out, I posted this in a reply to you 18 months ago. ...

Yes, he did. And you owe me $150 because you bet money that it was a pelvis.

By the way, just in case it hasn't sunk in yet, you lost that bet.

Science: "Black is black."

Mc Coy : "I'll bet you $150 that black is white"

Science: "Are you sure?"

Mc Coy; "Johanson stole a pelvis and he says that black is black, so since he is a liar then black is white."

Science: "Pay up."

Mc Coy: "I wasn't wrong."

Maybe I will pay up. If the person is willing to:

Sign this statement:

I _______________ , solemnly swear that I, in my bet, in no way thought that Johanson MAY NOT have trekked out to an Afar cemetary. I swear that it was only a pelvis that was in question. And I will even go so far as to say that if I am lying in this regard that I ask God to make my life here, in this world, now, become unbearable and unprosperous.

Signed _____________________

I've already admitted this, so why the need to sign such a thing? There was no requirement in the original bet for this, so once again we see that you're trying to weasel out of it.

You don't need any signed statements. You just need to look at the post in November 2001 in which gen2rev already describes how Johanson took a femur from a burial ground for comparison with a different fossil (not Lucy).

I've seen posts faked before and even placed in front of mine, thus taking over as author of the threads. If this be the case, sign the the statement.

Even if I did somehow insert the post (and I didn't), it's still mine. I don't deny that.

There's no reason to sign your statement, and no point. There's no reason to because this wasn't part of the original bet. There's no point because even if I sign, you wrote that "maybe" you'll pay. In the original bet, the implication was that you'd pay if you lost, no "maybe" about it. If you haven't paid after that implied certainty, why would you pay after saying that "maybe" you would?

Face it. Your word means nothing. Everyone knows it, including you. What's going to change if I sign this?

It is dishonorable to try to change the terms of the bet. Do you intend to display any honor at all, Mr. McCoy?

Let me tell you this AC. I made my point by specifying that something human was taken by Johanson who snuck over to a cemetary. If he can't and won't sign it I won't believe him. My argument hurt the cause of Johanson. Your belief in Johanson, without questioning, is disturbing.

We're talking about honor and your apparent lack of any. You refuse to pay gen2rev the money you owe him. That is dishonorable. Johanson admitted what he did. You, on the other hand, have been unrepentant in all the cases where you have been discovered, and now you won't even pay when honor-bound by the terms of the bet.

So don't turn this back on anybody else. This is your cupcake, not mine. I don't go around making bets with people who know the material better than I do.

The point was that you claimed that Johanson took a pelvis, and you bet money on it. You were wrong, yet you can't seem to bring yourself to suffer the consequences.

Why do you need to believe me? Johanson himself claimed to was a femur. I have no reason to think that he was lying about it. What does my belief have to do with anything?

I don't see how.

And your inability to keep your promises is disturbing. But I think everyone's use to that by now.

Note the date of this posting. A request for clarification is made upon McCoy's wager - before his trip to the library.

What exactly is your claim? Johanson does describe in his book "Lucy" how he "borrowed" and returned a pelvis from an Afar tribal bone repository. This was after the Lucy skeleton had been recovered, documented and a comparative anatomical analysis begun. The fossilized pelvis seemed to be more human-like than ape-like and Johanson and White needed a human pelvis so that they could accurately document the similarities and differences. You appear to be claiming some kind of fraud on their part, but It's obvious from Johanson's account that he was simply doing a careful comparative analysis. In trying to imply that the little and completely fossilized Lucy pelvis is actually that of a recently deceased Afar tribesman, you and Glen are being disingenuous and remarkably silly.

Actually Johanson doesn't say that. I just pulled out my copy of "Lucy", as I was getting tired of McCoy's refusal to support his claim. Needless to say, McCoy is mistaken about quite a few things. In the 1981 edition, the incident is discussed on pages 158-159.

Actually, Lucy hadn't even been discovered when this incident happened.

I don't want to give away too much at this stage, but let me just say that Johanson didn't do this. I really doubt McCoy has the faintest inkling of what Johanson actually did, and for what reason.

McCoy is making an embarassing mistake. It will be interesting to see what he does when he discovers that whatever creationist source he got this from got it wrong.

Zoom forward to after McCoy realises his mistake.

Are you not giving too much away at this stage because you're afraid to admit that Johanson snuck over to a cemetary to steal a human femur?

No, because he was waiting for you to loose a bet. Remember, you owe me $150.

... why won't you pay me the money you owe me?

As Arnold Schwarzneggar would say, "You must be joking."

Do I see any money. Did money fly around? Whyyyy. Money? Did you say money?

No, I'm quite serious. You made a bet, and you lost. When are you going to pay up?

Did you sign it? presumably the aforementioned statement.

Why should I? It wasn't part of the bet.

Pay up.

A great idea!

Thanks for the message Dave. Could you pay up for me in the meanwhile? Pseudonym Gen2rev hasn't signed the statement as far as I know.

That wasn't part of the bet, Mr. McCoy. Do you think it is honorable for a Christian to attempt to change the terms of an such an agreement after the fact, and if so, please show me where in the Bible you can justify this. Remember, this is your immortal soul that's on the line here, so perhaps you can explain to us the theological grounds on which you can try to add a clause after the completion of the contract. I bet Jesus wants to know as much as I do.

In my analysis I believe I'm right, being that in the end, in the spirit of what I had written and what I had intended to prove, I was right. And if pseudonym will acknowledge that, I will grant the $150. And YOU know I was right. Johanson did sneak over to the cemetary and did steal a femur. So if you think I'm wrong on that then speak up. I won.

I freely admit that Johanson stole a femur. And I've known it since I read the book twenty years ago.

Yes, yes he did.

He stole a femur. You're right about that.

I don't see how. You originally claimed that Johanson stole a pelvis. And you bet money on it. And you were wrong. But if it makes you feel better to say that you won, in spite of the fact that you lost $150, that's fine by me. but it seems like a pyrrhic victory.

Regarding all this nonsense about Johanson and your bet, I would refer you to Matthew 15:18-20, with particular attention to falsehood and slander. Also Matthew 19:16-18.

Well, does it include mistakes where you say pelvis instead of femur. Is that an attempt to falsehood? Additionally, it looks like more improprieties have been discovered as of late, improprieties that Johanson's group have participated in.

But it's now clear that you never intended to pay if you lost. You lied.

... the discussion about Johannson's discovery of Lucy (in which you made several completely unsubstantiated slanders and then lost a $150 bet which you refuse to pay) ...

On this bet that you claim that I had lost - please tell everyone the details that you are suppressing. I notice that everyone has been suppressing this info on purpose.

Why don't you quit changing subjects and pay gen2rev the money you owe him?

I don't owe DJT or Simpson money.

Did anyone claim that you did? But everyone knows that you owe me money, so when are you going to pay up?

Funny that you should say that. Because I already have a check written out to you. It's just a matter of having the cash. I figure that I can send it after I get back from my trip. Say, in June. The checks already written out to you. I already wrote on it proving you wrong once more. How many times do you have to be proved wrong. It's just you hadn't known it. I guess I just assume that you don't know. And DJT hadn't known that I had the encyclopedia sitting right in front me for at least a week before I wrote down the portion on Recapitulation. I always want to see what happens before I launch my last salvo. I also have the a cut and paste copy of Johanson's statement on accusations against him.

Also, just to let you know, if I had won the argument I would have not demanded that you send me $150. I would have let it go. I want to let you know that I have a different style then you do, and it goes all the way through. Sure, I would have teased you about having lost to my bet, but I wouldn't be doing what you're doing now.

What makes you think that I'll accept a check?

But that wasn't part of the bet. No doubt when you come back from your trip you'll find another excuse not to pay. I suggest you borrow the money, and pay as soon as possible.

And I'm to accept your word for it? Why should I? You're a proven liar.

So what? You have no evidence that anyone must sign a statement not be critical of evolution before they can examine Lucy.

Oh, I'll agree that you have a different "style" than I do, and heaven help me if I ever sink to your level. Of course, if the money wasn't important to you, I have to wonder why you didn't just make a bet with no penalty for the loser.

And what am I doing? Asking you to keep your word? We can't have people going around doing that now, can we?

P.S. You owe me $150.

I told you, I already have a check written out in your name, gen2rev.

Since you don't know my name, this is an obvious lie.

No gen2rev. I owe money to gen2rev so that's what I wrote the check out to. So where's your address gen2rev? IT is NOT A LIE.

I've asked John Pieret (AKA catshark) to look after donating the money to a worthy cause. Please have a money order made out in his name. I'm sure he'll send you his address shortly.

Hmmm. This gets interesting. I already wrote the check out to gen2rev. Now, how could I imagine that a pseudonym could cause so much trouble. But technicality is technicality, and I owe gen2rev money, and not John Pieret. So what's the address so I can send this check over with gen2rev on it?

One of my conditions for the bet was that if I won you'd pay the $150 "to whomever I choose". See this to refresh your memory. Since you didn't object to it at the time, I can only assume you agreed to it. After all, "technicality is technicality".

Besides, do you really think that a bank would honor a check made out to "gen2rev"? Either a) you're just being spiteful, or b) you're even more of an idiot than you get credit for. Personally, I'm leaning towards 'a', but whatever the case, please have a money order made up for John Pieret.

Spiteful is not the word. You forced me on a technicality, being that of a femur and not a pelvis, in disregard to the general argument. And I said I would bet that person, and not to somebody else. I never agreed to your stipulation.

Technicalities. You canned yourself by using a pseudonym.

Oh, I see. When you repeatedly asked me if I was sure I wanted to take you up on the bet, you had no intention of paying up if you lost, because I was using a pseudonym. I don't recall that not using a pseudonym was a term of the bet. In other words, your bet was in bad faith right from the start, and you're now just admitting it. I guess I was bang on when I wrote:

So tell me McCoy, do you feel you've behaved in a Christian manner? Do you really feel that when you're standing before His Awful Throne that God will just let this slide? Or is lying and not keeping your word the Christian thing to do? You portray Johanson as a bad person, but are you really any different from your portrayal of him? Are you any kind of Christian example at all?

Pay Catshark the $150 I won from you, and prove to me, and everyone else here, that I wrote above is wrong.

gen2rev, I bet gen2rev on the money so that's technically correct and that's who I owe to whether you like it or not. It occurred to me just before I wrote the check. I thought, that's kind of weird. The way that you and your pals went around badgering me and demanding payment while not even acknowledging the fact that I thought I had won because I won the spirit of my bet, tells me that you want equal treatment according to your folly. I am technically correct on this just as you are technically correct on the bet.

The fact is, if I said human femur and sneaking out to the cemetary I wouldn't have made an iota difference from the spirit of my contention. If it were a human skull it wouldn't have mattered or any other part of the human anatomy. And you won't acknowledge that I won the spirit of my bet. You're being a pesky technocrat and you deserve to be treated in the same spirit.

Ok, we'll play you little game. I repeat once again. Send me the check made out to "gen2rev". And again I warn you, the check had better be good. It is a crime to issue a bad check.

Fine. If you won't send the check to Catshark, then send it to me. The address is:

gen2rev
PO Box address obscured
Toronto ON address obscured
Canada

I'm sending this to you via e-mail as well, so you can't claim that you didn't see it.

I don't use a pseudonym; I post with my real name. Do you want my street address? I'll gladly tell you what it is if you're willing to send the check there. Your infantile sniping and false accusations are a pathetic smokescreen to disguise the fact that you are without honor.

You lied when you said you were wagering $150 of your own money, as it's becoming clear you have no intention of honoring the terms of the bet.

...

Your desperate attempts to make a mountain out of this molehill, nameless, will not conceal your own hypocrisy. You made the bet. You lost fair and square. Now pay up.

I wouldn't have a problem with this. There are now three different addresses that McCoy could send the check to. What's he waiting for?

Pathetic. I don't shift my standards on the account of Adam Marczyk. If you won't grant me any concessions neither will I. You know that I won the spirit of my argument and won't acknowledge it. You want to technicrat the argument on me and since you apply that strict standard I will equally be as strict in complying only to who I owe and that is the name Gen3rev.

Garbage. I wouldn't have offered that money if I hadn't thought I won the money. In fact, by the spirit of my argument gen3rev owes me money. But since he wants to technicrat a win for himself, I owe a technicratically strict amont of money to gen3rev, whether you like it or not.

No, I won the spirit of the debate. If you want to be strict about terminology, well then i will concede and owe to gen3rev and only to that name.

Life gets interesting when you play by the same rules. In this case you don't want the same rules, which sounds more like a power struggle rather than an effort to seek justice and fairness. That's why I don't trust evolutionists. By the way, I've already written the check out to Gen3rev.

No, nameless. As I have pointed out already, the conditions of the bet specifically preclude your dishonest attempt to get out of paying it. gen2rev said this:

In your response, you had only one objection to these conditions:

If you objected to the "whomever I choose" part, that would have been the time to do it. Instead, you said there was only one catch and it was about something different, implicitly agreeing to the rest of the terms.

You're not getting out of this, you coward. Pay up.

Looks like I never accepted Gen3Rev's answer. Too bad. I guess I was just in the spirit of paying him. I never accepted any terms.

So I guess you were just lying when you said this?

Are you saying you never had any intention of making good on that bet if you lost?

Well, I've been expecting this. McCoy's "I'm too stupid to live" defense. It is obvious from your numerous admissions you have made, that you owe gen2rev the $150, that you thought that you had entered into a bet. So now you are saying "Gee, I'm such an idiot I didn't even realize I never bet him! Duh!"

Ok, let's go back through all the posts. ...

Lying to save face is something you probably know all about, nameless. Have you sent out that $150 check to John Pieret? Need the address again?

For your information, I offered a bet, and it was accepted, but I never accepted that acceptance. Terms were set so the the whole bet is illegitamate and null and void. It's called technicalities, you know, femur and pelvis. Technicalities.

You lying waste of amino acids. You set the terms, and made the offer. Nobody forced you to do this. Once you had done this, there was no need for anyone to accept the acceptance. You offered the bet and it was taken up and you lost. Fair and square. You have the morals of a slug.

Yeah, but the acceptance specified specific limits like "within a week" and that sort of thing. I didn't think that I could make it so I never accepted for that reason. If that stipulation was never made I would have accepted at the time. So I ended up never accepting. You can get mad about this but I never accepted the $300 bet either. There are reasons as to why lawyers will tell you that my bet is not legitamate for those reasons. You may accuse me of having morals of a slug but aren't you talking about the technicality guy who won't accept pelvis for femur? I am perfectly well within the law, and you have no grounds to stand on. If the law upholds me and you don't that means you're wrong and you're wrong for persuing this. I was perfectly willing to go beyond the technicalities of the bet and flow with the spirit of the intent, except you are WILL NOT acknowledge that I had won the spirit and intent of the bet and further your pressuring and harping has reach beyond it's limits. You keep bringing it up even in threads that have no bearing on the matter to force your way. If anything, this is the straw that breaks the camels back. Simply put, you're rude and undeserving. I need not honor a bet whose acceptance rife with stipulation has not even been accepted.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, I extended that to two weeks, and I probably would have extended it further had you asked. Do you really think I would have declared myself the winner if you hadn't gone to the library within two weeks???

Of course, then we would have been waiting for years for you to go to the library.

Its okay, you don't need to make any more excuses, we all knew you would never pay gen2rev the $150 you owe him. If the bet had been prepared in writing by lawyers and signed by both of you in blood, you would never have paid gen2rev the $150 you owe him.

We've known all along that you are a complete failure as a human being. We don't obviously know anything about your life away from this newsgroup, but it is not difficult to imagine some pretty sad, or even scary circumstances. This is reflected in your despicable lack of a sense of responsibility and your nonexistent conscience. You are a miserable "waste of amino acids". The world would have been a better place had you not been born.

That's retarded. I never even bet gen2rev. I bet Dana Tweedy. Gen3rev sort of jumped into the conversation. So there, additionally according to femur/pelvis standards, I don't owe gen3rev a thing. Which is ironic because you evolutionists pride yourself on being technically accurate on everything, and you blew it by makeing some false assumptions. I mean, you're the guys who will complain about a so-called creationist organization listing in a creationist credentials his status in a university, when the status had changed. Well, gee, if I were a creationist that changed departments, should I send out a revised reference to every creationist organization I know? Yet you demand it. And somehow you think that in not publishing that information a creationist is deceptive.

And I turned you down, partly because I didn't trust you to honor your bets. I see I was right. It had been almost 20 years since I read Johanson's book, and I didn't trust my memory of it. That's why I requested a reference. I am not foolish enough to bet on a 20 year old memory.

You were quick to accept his offer though. Your problem was you were too arrogant and foolish to read the terms of the bet.

You owe gen2rev $150. We all saw you accept his bet, and we all saw you lose it. You arrogantly, and erroneously thought you were betting on whether or not Johanson visited a burial mound, which was not the issue at hand. Gen2rev already knew that he had. The issue was what bone was taken, which was your contention. If you were so foolish as to bet on something you weren't sure about, that's your problem. Now you are trying to weasel out.

...

Pay up, salvage what little dignity you have.

Hey, I know it's often dificult to keep track of what one says on Usenet. That is why I have gone to the trouble of tracking down all of the relevant posts for you. I also posted this in the thread you started in order to lie to everyone about how you do not owe anybody anything. I think I'll post it in a new thread just in case someone should miss it. Don't bother thanking me. I only do these things because I have integrity and self-respect. Pity you don't.

But who cares?

... I also documented the fact that Johanson snuck over to a human cemetary with a friend. Tweedy countered that Johanson did not sneak over to the cemetary. I countered, using Johanson's own word, "caught" that he had. I bet Tweedy $150 and not Gen3rev. So Gen3rev is wrong.

Most of us here care. You bet gen2rev, not gen3rev. Now you are trying to weasel out of it. You are dishonest and a welcher.

... You bet that you could prove that Johanson took a pelvis. He didn't. You lost your bet, now you are trying to welch on your bet.

No, I asked you to produce a citation to support your claim. I produced the citation before you did, and discovered you were wrong in what you claimed. Johanson did visit a burial mound, and took a bone. It was not a night, and there was no reason to suspect that Johanson and his grad student were sneaking. They didn't want to be seen by the local Afar tribesmen. There is no reason to suspect they didn't let the others in the expedition know were they were going and why.

You asked me to bet $150, and I refused, partly because I suspected you would never pay your debts. Gen2rev took you up on your bet, and you lost it fair and square. Now, pay up.

I've received an e-mail from John McCoy. He states that he's going to visit Turkey in a few weeks, and will return at the beginning of June. He'd like to have the money he owes me available in case he runs into problems while traveling. He claims that he's already written a check, and that he'll send it to me about a month after he gets back, using that time interval to raise more funds.

I don't think his request for more time is unreasonable. It's a good idea to have money available when traveling almost halfway around the world, and I don't wish him bad luck while traveling. I wouldn't want him to be in a situation that he couldn't get out of for lack of money (or for any other reason).

However...

I admit that I trust him about as far as I can throw him. So this is what I propose: McCoy can send me the check now, and I give my word in front of all who read this that I will not attempt to cash it until July the 1st. After all, he's asking me to trust him, so it's not unreasonable that I ask him to trust me. If I break this promise, I ask that I be treated as a pariah, and my reputation be dragged through the mud (or what ever passes for it on talk.origins). As soon as this message appears on the newsgroup, I'll send him the message ID so he can see that I've made this pledge in front of the whole world.

Look Gen2rev, you're really asking for it. How about if I DIDN"T SEND YOU ANYTHING AT ALL? No, I won't send you anything. Your baiting and your friend's baiting are really annoying, and even after I said that I would send a check you still come across as self-grandizing. I know for one thing for a fact, and that is you never could claim to have championed any thought for evolution in your bet with me. You can't say in retrospect, that "McCoy lost a bet and I proved evolution true and Donald Johanson was not sneaky." You'll never be able to claim that. You'll just parade a personal ad homenim attack against me in perpetuity saying that you won a debate and I never sent you anything. I'll allow you to do that because that just shows you how fundamentally wrong you are on this stand that you've taken for the cause of evolution. You're willing to use illogic in your stance. Go ahead and do that.

But just remember that Johanson is a sneaky law-breaking man who has been scrutinized for improprieties.

Your anger inducing statements just tells me that I don't want to be an evolutionist like you. Your arrogance, and your repeated harping, and even DEMAND that I send you the money right now just shows me that you deserve NO RESPECT.

I believe that in the spirit of what I was trying to prove, that Johanson was a sneaky man who stole a human bone from a cemetary, that I won. And I believed it from the start. When i realized that I said the wrong bone, I was not happy in the least. But it was a human bone. You've latched onto that with demands for immediate response and payment even after I told you that I would send it.

Your ill treatment and disrespect earns no respect from me. Go ahead and parade your "McCoy hasn't paid me yet" tripe to all. You'll bring that up in each and every argument regarding evolution no matter how irrelevant it is. You and your soc puppets may dominate some of these threads but be forewarned that I don't need to post here. This isn't my life. I don't want to debate with you or anyone else who can't debate honestly. I've tried to live up to my part, but all you seem to want to do is to humiliate and parade me on this issue because I won't send you money RIGHT NOW.

I don't know about you, but either you're some loser dealing drugs and needs a quick fix, or you're looking for something to debate. To think that I was planning on sending that money, and even thinking about it as I was checking the newsgroups, and then I read this little insult of yours online. Heck, I'm not sending a little tripe like you anything unless you grow up and apologize. I know, you'll attack me as a hypocritical loser of a Christian who isn't living up to his words. Well, and you're a technicrat looking for marginal ways to win an argument even though you've lost the main portion of the debate. I've never claimed to be perfect and I am not the best representative of Christ and surely Christ would not approve of what I'm doing, but I'll tell you something, you've better grow up and start treating people with respect or they won't treat you with respect in return. I'm just some guy who knows that the Bible is the truth and I realize that I'm under judgement from it. I risk going to hell. I can't rationalize away what I know to be the truth. I'm not going believe in evolution because my ways are not pure and 100% good. The evidence alone convinces me that the Bible is true and I fear and tremble. I guess if I based my beliefs on emotions I'd be an evolutionist because then I wouldn't have to fear and tremble. The only reason I'm bring my creationist beliefs forward is that, maybe I won't be saved, but somebody else who is better than me will be. But you're wrong in making your grubby demands. And you're a coward behind a mask. If you don't want a good debate about evolution, fine. Why don't you take it to talk.adhomenem.

Have fun and goodbye.

In the message you're responding to I state that I'm not going to cash the check until July the 1st, which is significantly different from demanding the money right now, which I had done previously. I'm just asking to have the check in my hands as soon as possible. Is that unreasonable?

Sorry for my outburst. I was wondering why I was angry with you and had misread your statement. The reason is the heading. It says I owe you money. I suggest being a little more tactful when you write headings.

You do owe me money.

And I would suggest that you read posts before responding to them.

Just to repeat myself, here's the deal: You send me the check now. I cash it July 1st. As soon as I get the check in my hands I ask people to stop quizzing you about it. But until that time...

I suggest you get a check in the mail as soon as possible.

I'll be leaving for Turkey this month on the 22. I won't actually leave this country until the 23, with a stop in New York and Paris for transfers. I will actually be standing on Wyatt's Noah's Ark site for two days. This will be the first time that I will have been there. I will bring camcorders and cameras to document everything.

Tell him to blow his money out of his fat arse.

I wouldn't send him any money over a post on a crappy newsgroup.

If he wants it tell him to come and collect if he has the balls.

The issue here really isn't money. The issue is McCoy's credibility and character.

No it's not. It's about Gen2rev's character and wanting money over a pelvis. That money grubber.

... It's Gen2rev who has demanded money.

Let me see if I've got this right. I took you up on a bet that you offered, and won, and that makes me a moneygrubber. You ask if you can put off payment until July, and I agree (subject to one condition), and I'm a moneygrubber.

You offered money. I took you up on the offer. Was I wrong to do that?

What makes you a money grubber is the tone and manner of your demand.

Haven't I made arrangements with you on the time that I would send the check, and the insults continue?

Can you be more specific? Can you point to a particular post?

I've requested that you send the check immediately, but I have yet to see any indication from you that you've done so.

This life is only a SHADOW of things to come. Life is a test. It is also an opportunity for you to choose whether you want Eternal Life or Eternal Death. The question is not about what anyone wants you to do, but what you want. It's a personal decision that affects your life and your life only.

If life's only a trial run for the afterlife, perhaps you should be paying more attention to your behavior. Lying, sniveling, welching, and being cowardly aren't going to win you many points with God. You have a chance to free yourself, of part of that for the paltry sum of $150. Why not begin earning your Eternal Life, rather than slouching towards eternal death?

If you want to argue over Pelvises and Femurs, that fine with me, but don't go around saying that Gen2rev won anything that had to do with the evo/creation debate.

I didn't. I am saying you lost your bet, and you don't want to pay.

Nobody wants to pay on a bet, DJT. What makes this worse is that I would be paying Gen2rev for him winning on a bet that makes Johanson look bad. Heck, I still feel that I should be collecting. For pseudonym Gen2rev it's much like a technical victory rather than a philosophical victory for evolution. But it's not whether I want to or do not want to pay, it's what I'm intending to do that counts.

I wouldn't even go so far as to say it's a technical victory for evolution. It has nothing to do with evolution.

DJT, I suggest that you back off. I've been discussing this in e-mails and have discussed the time and sofourth. If you and your cohorts decide to keep pestering me I will not pay and leave talk.origins. You're using this issue to try to discredit me.

Oh, what a tragedy, who else can we get to do a comedy act like yours? We know you won't pay anyway, so what's the difference?

You discredited yourself. Everywhere you go, your discredit will follow you.

No. You've just discredited yourself. You've just said (so I don't have to document or "cite" as you like to say) that "you won't pay anyway.." which means you either claim that you know the future (and you do not) or that you like to make things up as you go along.

Does this mean that you are going to pay? Is the check in the mail?

Pseudonym Gen2rev, if someone around here, your buddies, make me mad enough, I won't pay. If I die in Turkey I won't pay. If calamity befalls me I won't pay. But in my mind, right as I'm sitting here typing, my intention is to pay. I can't speak for the future, however.

So far you have given no indication that you will pay, and considering your shameful behavior in the past, it's a reasonable assumption that you will not pay.

There has been no shameful behavior in the past on my part, but your part. Gen2rev should have done what I would have done. I had no intentions of forcing anyone to pay on my bet even if I had won. And the fact is, it's a shame that pseudonym Gen2rev is collecting on something that doesn't strengthen his support for Johanson, but rather tears it down. It feels strange that I, a creationist, am sending money on a bet that an evolutionist won,that actually strengthens my case against evolutionist Johanson. I feel it strange that pseudonym Gen2rev wants the money so bad that he can't see that. Additionally, it's shameful that you're not minding your own business. You're not a party to any of my e-mails.

Then why has it been over a month since you lost the bet, and I haven't seen any money?

So you say, but I see no reason to believe you. Besides, if you had no intention to collect, why did you write "Pay up or..... OK. I'll be nice and not finish that phrase" in this message?

As far as I'm concerned, it has nothing to do with supporting Johanson. You made a claim that you couldn't support. Dana is absolutely right about this, it has everything to do with your habit of making unsupported assertions. You seem to feel that you can waltz in and make any claim you want. In fact, you were so accustomed to doing this that you bet money on a claim *before* *checking* *it*! This is what could politely be called 'sloppy'.

You have yet to show how, aside from some hand waving that Lucy is a forgery. Yet another claim that you can't support.

And I find it strange (but not unexpected) that you're trying to change the issue. You made a bet and you lost. Pay up, and show that your word means something.

All two of them. Personally, I don't have a problem with anyone's curiosity in this whole thing. Why do you?

I've been reading all the anti-Ron Wyatt sites for quite awhile. I now offer a website to contend with the misinformation that has been bandied about on newsgroups such as this one.

My website is small right now, but I will update it every day.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/mccoy007/index.html

following-up to alt.talk.creationism and talk.origins

I just wanted to let folks know what our beloved McNameless has been up to recently. This showed up on sci.archaeology today.

Hey, McWelsher's back!

Where's the $150 you owe gen2rev?

Where's the $1500 I need for my dental expenses? I wonder where that saying "no pain no gain comes from?"

Maybe you should have thought of that before you made a $150 bet...

Are you saying we're supposed to feel sorry for you? After the extraordinary amount of dishonesty you've displayed, climaxing in your losing a bet which you ultimately promised you would pay in full, now you expect any of us to actually accept excuses?

The only thing that you should feel sorry for is that you and your comrades cannot refute the items on my web site.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/mccoy007/index.html

And you never will.

Where's the $150 you owe gen2rev, John. You owe it to him. Where's the public apology for slandering Dr. Johanson? Where's your confession that you plagiarized those mined quotes?

I know you hope that everyone will forget your dishonorable behavior, but I don't, John. So why don't we deal with old business instead of delving into another one of your cesspools?

It's fascinating that while even Capuchin Monkeys can show a sense of justice, McCoy apparently cannot.

DJT, you're the black pot calling the kettle black.

When have I ever welched on a bet?

So, John, how was the trip to Turkey? The last I heard from you, you said you were leaving to go off to Turkey to check out Noah's Ark. After you got back, you promised to pay gen2rev the $150.00 (US) that you owe him for the bet you lost.

Tell us about the trip.

Send the check.

Believe it or not, I still intend to pay him back.

When? What's stopping you?

...

Maybe we'll find a quality debater around here.

Or maybe you can admit you copied and pasted those mined quotes, and can also make a public apology for your slander against Johanson.

And while you're at it, you still owe gen2rev some money. So pay up.

First, you ask Johanson to return all the bones that he never returned.

Then ask him to explain why he has a bad reputation in Afar.

Additionally, let's not get off track.

Read all the rebuttal's to all the bad anti-wyatt links, at Wyatt Defense.

I'm not interested in your site until you:

1. Admit you copied and pasted those quotes.

2. Publicly apologize for your slander against Johanson.

3. Pay gen2rev the $150 you owe him.

What kind of Christian are you? You sure don't seem like a very good one to me? Lying, not paying your debts of honor and slandering your fellow man.

Off track? Let's conclude unfinished business! Pay me the money you owe me.

After some mincing between AC and McCoy

So where would you like to discuss your $150 debit to me?

Sorry gen3 whatever. When are you going to discuss something relevant, one that has to do with thsi thread's name?

Please, no one liners.

I just want to know when you're going to pay me. Is that such a hard question to answer?

Please, no more evasion.

I'm not interest in new bullshit, John. You can run from me forever, but I'm not talking new with you until we deal with old.

This posting is duplicated in a number of places in this thread.

Only a novice could not see that you're not addressing the title of the thread, and that you are trying to attack me personally, in matters that do not concern you. You are in violation of that. And furthermore, what is too hard about discussing a boat shaped formation that has a pattern of iron in it? Are you afraid that I can prove that there is a pattern there?

You're language reflects that you cannot be trusted and that you are counting on emotions to sway the audience. These days people consider science more than emotions, so you better take them elsewhere. Nobody cares about what you are interested in or not interested in. They saw the thread title "Ken Down and the truth about Wyatt." Of which you have not addressed the following words: Ken Down and Wyatt. So unless you profer some information you lose. Note that you keep clipping out my questions about the thread and thus think you're not accountable for the discussion at hand. For starters, please answer this (and if you keep ignoring and clipping it out, I'll just repaste it and we'll go from there until you've dealt with the question. If you don't that proves that you can't and won't contend with the facts, but rather are, rather proud of dealing in ad hominem, which is all that I get around from amateurs, such as you, who post to talk.origins. You waste our time and should leave immediately, so that those of us who wish to discuss REAL SCIENCE can get on with it.

No violation. I, for one, told you I would not let these issues rest until you made good. You were warned, and I'm keeping my word. What a pity a so-called Christian like yourself is so lack in honor.

You've been told this before. Stay out of my affairs. You don't run my bank account, you're not the one handling my jobs and you're not the one handling my resources. Judge not that ye be not judged. Now, back to the main point that you forgot to answer:

So when is the person in charge of your resources going to pay me the $150 that I'm owed?

Pay gen2rev the $150 you owe him.

Like I told you before, my transactions between a person are private and therefore none of your business. Therefore, I suggest that you start getting back to the issue. What about, as the THREAD SAYS, "Ken Down and the truth about Wyatt."

Just to let every newcomer to this group see the obvious, AC and his buddies, the amateur skeptics deal only with ad Hominem . Personal attacks allow them to evade answering questions and defending their point of view. Which is bankrupt.

As far as I'm concerned, the issue is "when are you going to pay me?" I welcome, nay, encourage, public scrutiny of our dealings. Otherwise, I'll probably never get paid, as you'll try and weasel out of it.

It's not ad hominem to question the character of a known liar. Honor obviously means nothing to you, but perhaps public humiliation will.

Oh impatient one. Don't let greed twist your perspective.

Now, let's get back to the real discussion, the discussion about Ken Down and the truth about Wyatt. The subject that scares you.

What would your reaction be if your employer used this line on you? Pay the money you promised you'd pay me. You're late.

The "real discussion" is your lack of ethics.

The Noachian Flood? It never happened. Care to debate it?

You know what, Gen2rev? This reminds me of an account in the Old Testament where the Israelites griped about Moses while they were in the desert. The point is that they were impatient and started making demands. No wonder you don't believe in Wyatt's claims and the literal truth of the Bible. Your own actions clearly demonstrate this truth. Those who have impatient minds are not worthy of the truth and no matter hard they try truth seems to elude them. Which also leads to another point, those who have promoted their anti-Wyatt websites have not interviewed supporters of Wyatt and Wyatt himself. They latched on to readily made viewpoints from critics. They were impatient. Those who are impatient cannot receive the truth. You've called me a "liar" and you've tried to strong arm money on your timing without any other consideration. The day you recieve your check is the day I'll bring up your "liar" quotes.

You're no Moses.

The point is, you told me you'd pay me when you got back from Turkey. What happened? Where you lying?

The reason I don't believe in Wyatt's claims or the literal truth of the Bible is because they're contradicted by God's creation.

I fail to see how expecting someone to do what they said they'd do when they said they'd do it is impatient.

I'm not asking you for truth, I'm asking you to keep your word and pay me the money you owe me.

That's not true at all. You asked if you could pay me when you got back from Turkey, and I said that was fine. Remember this?

Go ahead. I look forward to that.

According to the Requests for FAQs page, a FAQ on "Determining distances to astronomical objects" is missing in the talk.origins archives.

I've tried to write one, you can find it here. I tried to keep it on a level which laymen can understand (with Zoe in mind...) and therefore explained some things which may seem to be obvious to most of you.

This is my first draft and my very first attempt to write a FAQ, so please be a bit merciful with me.

...

P.S.: I got some links from the thread "How far are the stars?" some months ago; thanks to all the people who provided answers to McNameless' question back then!

See Bjoern's success attempt here.

I have a suggestion for your FAQ on distance and space. Write for answer number 37, "McCoy, I want my money right now. Signed Gen3rev."

Is there a question 37 that I should be putting into context here?

Well, let's see:

1) No attempt at all to deal with what is written in the FAQ (although McCoy's own post "How far are the stars?" was one of the reasons I started to write it!).

2) A silly joke.

3) Still refusing to pay gen2rev the money he owes him.

4) Can't even spell gen2rev's nickname right.

Summary: A typical McCoy post, full of nonsense, but devoid of any valuable content.

Funny, wasn't it?

Where's gen2rev's money, John?

It's fascinating to read how evolutionists are trying to give an alternative explaination for the Piltdown Hoax, that is, any explanation rather than the obvious, namely, that evolutionists tried to convince the world of evolution.

In light of numerous fraudulent drawings and now computer animation, and a prolifera of boring technical manuals designed to fool the naive, why shouldn't we believe the best explanation? That evolutionists conned the world, intentionally.

Re. Nebraska Man
Faked embryo charts by Haeckel
Reluctance of textbook publishers to stop printing copies of Haeckel's charts.

Just pay gen2rev is $150, John. You know very well the above is just more of your dishonesty. You are a liar and a cheat.

History has proven you a liar so you might as well stop sending out false accusations Aaron. You were told to go mind your own business so I suggest that you go mind your own business and quit calling attention to yourself and quit making yourself into a liar. The $150 business has already been discussed elsewhere and you've lied about me for much too long. Since it is none of your business I suggest that you keep to your own business.

I'm not lying. The regulars on this newsgroup know you owe gen2rev $150. You made the bet in public, and I told you that I would not discuss anything else until you had resolved it. I'm keeping my word, John. What a pity you don't.

Referring to Jackson's Chameleon, and its relation to Triceratops

That's contrary to evolution, which says that we start out small, and evolve into bigger and better.

I'd love to discuss this claim of yours with you. All that is required is that you pay gen2rev the $150 you owe him.

I'd love to sue you for this false claim of yours. All that is required is that you continue to lie about me.

Sue your heart out, John. You still owe gen2rev $150. Pay up.

to McCoy Please identify the specific lie and the location of the lie that you claim is being made. Ask those who are lying to retract the specific lie. Give them an appropriate amount of time to respond. If you do nothing but vague assertions that a lie is being told, you have no chance of winning and have a very good chance of losing a countersuit for abuse of process.

What you don't know can hurt you. As long as you're in the dark, and maybe you're allowed to be in the dark, you can keep on digging a pit large enough to bury you. That's why I can keep calling you a slanderer, which you are.

Pay gen2rev the $150 you owe him. The truth ain't slander, John. You owe him money. You promised to pay him when you got back from Turkey. You're back. He doesn't have his money. So pay up. The cheap theatrics and the threats of a lawsuit only make this more delicious.

Mind your own business Aaron the slanderer. You're not telling the truth. Quit lying and stay out of none-of-your-business territory.

I recently checked my post office box, and much to my surprise there was an envelope from John McCoy waiting for me, and inside was a check. However, the check is uncashable because the amount has been changed from $150 to $160 in both the $ section and the section where the amount is spelled out. Also, the "pay to the order of" section is blank.

Those interested in seeing the check can go to here where I've posted images of both the check and the envelope it came in. McCoy's address, account number, and financial institution have been blacked out to protect his privacy.

Warning: The server is a bit slow, and the images add up to about 95K in size.

Residents of or visitors to the Toronto area can get in touch with me if they wish, and I'll be happy to show them the originals.

Knucklehead. Go and cash it. It is cashable. Believe me. If it doesn't work, inform me and I will make it right. I was set upon $160 from the start. When I inadvertantly wrote in $150 I thought my alteration would not be noticed. I will send another check if it doesn't work out.

Jeez, McCoy, everyone who even lurks here saw the events unfold. Pay up!

Ulrich, don't claim to be speaking for all the soc puppets around here, all claiming to be separate entities, all doing the bidding of gen2rev. You haven't seen all the events unfold. You haven't seen anything yet. And just wait, I have something up my sleeve that's going to prove that you're all slanderers, liars, and presumptuous skeptics. You think you don't know that God exists, yet you think that you know that you're not slanderers . And you are slanderers. I lie not.

Writing gen2rev a check he cannot cash doesn't absolve you of your debt.

Mark my words Mark. You're a slanderer too. I told you to keep out of my business. It's none of your business. Quit digging a pit that you can't climb out of, Mark. I'm telling you this to your own benefit. But wait, it's too late. You've already put your words into print.

The truth can't be slander. The above isn't even an insult: it's just a statement of fact. You wrote a check to gen2rev which was uncashable. That matter is beyond dispute. As you still have your $150, and gen2rev does not, it would seem odd to argue that you've paid your debt.

As for your childish rants about lawsuits, hey, bring it on. If you display as much knowledge of the law as you do about every other topic, I'll probably end up owning whatever meager possessions you own.

nameless is going for the limit this time.

dear nameless... next time, initial the changes.

And make the check out to either an actual person or at least to cash or something.

You think so? Gee, I'd just assumed that McCoy intentionally mucked the check so that he could claim he'd kept his word, while knowning it's invalid.

Knucklehead, If Gen2rev doesn't get the $160 that is plain egg on my face, dummy. He should try to cash it.

Given that there's uncertainly as to how much the check is for, I'd ask that you send another one, and place a stop-payment on the check I have. How is any bank teller going to decide between $150 and $160? There's no reason for them to take my word of it, and when it eventually winds its way back to your bank branch, they won't even have my word to go on. Please send another check, as I believe that this will reduce confusion and headaches in the long run.

Better yet, send a money order made out to gen2rev, and this way there will be no ambiguity as to the amount.

Thanks in advance.

This will be my last post until gen2rev sends me back the check and he receives another check in exchange, or asks for a letter of authentication and receives it. I thought gen2rev would have cashed the check by now and the issue would have been settled. When I receive the check back, and I assume that it will happen real soon, I will have another friend cash it as proof.

I have lots of other things that I could do right now so newsgroups is not a primary option. So I will wait until gen2rev sends the check.

As I have explained several times now, it would be a bad idea to send it back. Someone could steal it in-transit.

What happened to the option of sending a letter of authentication?

Starting a new thread, which replies to a different thread, unrelated to the gambit.

Can you tell me when gen2rev is going to send me my blank check so I can pay him? Just wondering.

Delurking to tell you to stop being such a lying, deceitful scum and PAY THE GUY!

With you as a shining example of the utter dishonesty and depravity that Christianity engenders, may that false religion die out as soon as possible so that the world can become a better place.

Now go slither back under your rock.

False accuser! What gives you the right to judge me? What psychic powers do you have? And WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS ANYWAY? I THOUGHT THIS MATTER WOULD HAVE BEEN SETTLED WITH MY LAST CHECK. SO YOU CAN QUIT MAKING THESE UNFAIR ACCUSATIONS AND NAME CALLING.

I WILL REPEAT MYSELF. When is Gen2rev going to send back my check?

I just got back from sending it. I wrote "VOID" on it, as per your suggestion that you e-mailed me yesterday.

From the subsequent postings in this thread, I'm suspicious of the post time's accuracy -- many people apparently overlook this message. McCoy does not respond to it.

I don't know, but if I were gen2rev, I'd tear it up properly and mail it back. If it is sent back blank, it would be too easy for someone to try to cash it at a bank that is careless about such things and you would be out $160.00 and still owe gen2rev the money. Why don't you give him a sensible option?

I don't know what the big deal is, really. I e-mailed him telling him to write void on the check. I'm serious. I want to get this over and done. There's enough money to cover the check in the bank. Please stop this insanity and send that check.

Just pay gen2rev the money you owe him. I promised to you months ago I wasn't going to let this go. I keep my word. Let's see if you can keep yours.

AC, you've claimed that you pay your debts, assuming that you tell the truth, then you insinuate that I don't . Gen2rev received my check. You insinuate without any evidence for proof, that I intended to send a bad check. I had not. You're DEAD WRONG. You have no right to make such insinuations and so you should keep to your self and stay out of my business. You can't read minds and therefore you should stay out of my business. The matter should have been settled by now and I have responded promptly to make this close. Gen2rev is not responding to me in my e-mails, claims that he's making a decision, and you're speaking as if you were gen2rev, with the same voice, out of the same place - Canada, and making a big deal out of something that Gen2rev could have easily settled. He was even urged to send a check back to me with the words void written on them. So I urge you, AC/Gen2rev to send me that check immediately. Quit the charade and let this matter come to an end.

Quit snivelling and send gen2rev his money.

I hate to be uncharitable, but you're really behaving like a lowlife weasel, John. Grow up and pay him already; stop whining and trying to trick your way out of it.

BTW, Craig was obviously trolling. Apparently sarcasm is as far from your comprehension as are honor and honesty.

ACTUALLY, you were told to stay out of my business and you are not, so you're the LOWLIFE weasel.

This matter should have been settled with my last check, and gen2rev should have been able to cash it. So your accusation about "weasel" fall short. I've already taken immediate steps to settle the matter. Your voice seems to be identical to gen2rev, a pseudonym, and you, are a pseudonym too. AC, who keeps chanting, "pay up" to gen2rev, lives in Canada where gen2rev is supposed to receive his check. Same voice, same mean-spiritedness, and even DEMANDS. Now if gen2rev is DEMANDING money in the form of numerous pseudonyms, that puts a new picture on the table.

These FALSE ACCUSATIONS in the form of insinuations and even flat out declarations need to be stopped.

IT's time for you to GROW UP RAVEN (a comical pen name made up so as to not be taken seriously).

You're trying my patience. And since you're not a Christian I suppose you don't know what it means to be patient? Love is kind, love is patient, long suffering, and so fourth. No wonder you're not a Christian.

You can't rush these things. I've just read a post where gen2rev said that he is now considering his next move. Fair is fair, Raven, so tell him to make his next move now. Be fair about it. And if you are gen2rev, then start talking to yourself. Gen2rev doesn't seem to be anxious to have his money back. His compandres, like AC, who do his dirty work (gen2rev manipulating behind the scenes) seem to think that unethical behavior is righteous. Give me a break.

No wonder you're evolutionists, you make quick snap judgements which aren't based on facts.

Pay your debts, and stop being a weasel. That should stop people calling you a weasel.

I am disgusted by your behavior. Demanding money in the form of soc puppets is despicable, even while I have shown good faith, sent out a check, and even on the very day that a fault was shown in the check to make proper and speedy remedy. Yet these puppets try to play it up, insinuating that I have no intention to pay. That in itself is WRONG and UNEXCUSABLE. You can't put words into my mouth, nor read my mind. On the other hand, Gen2rev doesn't respond to my e-mail, sits back, smirks and pens his messages and demands in his soc puppets. Sorry, stayoutofmybusinessDanaTweedy, it's time for you to stop this despicable behavior and argue what we've all come here to do. Origins.

No one's demanding money in the form of sock puppets.

Six months late...

No, you didn't.

Then why did it take you so long to send a check in the first place?

Because, as I have pointed out before, it's not working right now.

Nope, sorry, you're making that up. It's all wishful thinking. You can't imagine gaining the kind of support that I've been fortunate enough to get (thanks again to everyone).

But you also seem to think that it's a forum for gambling as well.

Sorry to cut you off Dana, but it is truly none of your business and Gen2rev will receive a check, as I had intended to send, and in good faith.

It's public business, John. You made the bet in public. You lost in public. You promised to pay in public. And now you're trying desperately to appear as if you aren't trying to weasel out of it in public. Shame on you.

The reason I told you to stay out of the bet, RAVEN, a pseudonym made up to be not taken seriously, is that all of you do not know the entire scope of these personal matters. For one, you're insinuating that I sent a faulty check ON PURPOSE. You have no right to make that insinuation since you do not have ALL of the facts. I'll ask you a question, in a court of law, can you prove that I sent that check thinking that it could not be cashed? Maybe I can prove that I did think it could be cashed.

That's why you should stay OUT of my business.

Given your history of mendacity, and your months of trying to weasel out of paying, what would you expect anyone to think? Particularly since there was no plausible legitimate reason for you to alter it the way that you did.

I figured you would say something like this. But it is irrelevant. Here you're insinuating that I was trying to weasel out of paying. You can't prove that.

Why has it taken so long?

What does time have to do with it? During that time I was making preparations. And when I sent that check, I told nobody, not even you. And when I made my reappearance in the talk.origins group I made no mention of it. I just kept track of all the false accusations that were made about me even as the check was somewhere between here and Canada.

We've been through this before gen2rev, answering for Raven. You and your cohorts have acted dishonorably, while I've made good attempt to make amends. For this reason you scramble to save face and spare your embarrassment. I suggest that you hunker down, wait for that check and contend with the real issues.

Is this the excuse you use on the electric company when they ask for payment? That you're "making preparations"? In this message you complain that Johanson hasn't returned bones to Ethiopia. Using your reasoning, he could simply state that he was "making preparations". Can we assume that you won't be complaining about Johanson having bones from Ethiopia in the future?

Why not?

But they weren't false. The check was useless, and you haven't paid me yet.

Answering for Raven? No, I'm just pointing out the flaws in your argument.

Good attempt? Why did it take so long? Why didn't you pay me at the beginning of July like you said you would? Heck, why did you ask me to let you pay then, rather than as soon as you lost the bet? Why is it that it's been two weeks since you became aware that the check was useless, and I still don't have a replacement?

Pointing out the flaws in your argument can hardly be called scrambling to save face.

They real issue is that you avoid living up to your promises and responsibilities.

Sorry to put an end to your gleeful gloating and your insults and insinuations, but today I received a notice in the mail, stating that a certain piece of mail arrived from Canada. If it proves to be the case, then tomorrow I will be sending a check, if things go OK.

And when gen2rev confirms he has your $150, we can move on.

And you want to move on? As if "we" wanted to move on? I am moving on. I don't know about you, but I find this topic regarding Johanson, his taking bones, needing to get grant monies, of his organization profitting at the expense of the Ethiopian government, of violating someone else's area of field work, etc.

Since I doubt that we can find the right actors to duplicate Johanson, I've felt that computer animation would do. I feel that ...

Sorry John, not until gen2rev says he has the $150. I know you would love for everyone to forget the bet and the implications it holds for just what kind of person you are, but it's not going to happen. If you finally do keep your word, then in little over a week this should be settled.

McCoy wrote, in a previous post:

I publicly condone all of John McCoy's personal property.

The yard sale is on Saturday. All proceeds will go to the "Pay gen2rev what he's owed" fund.

Good idea. I condone all his real property. Sherrif's sale to be held on the steps of the county courthouse, with proceeds to go to the "Pay gen2rev what he's owed" fund. With my broker's fee taken out first, of course :-).

If you mean real estate, I own none. IF you think I'm going to sell off my computer to send in some cash, you can forget it. But as I've related in another thread, tomorrow I will attempt to check out the post office. If the check is in the envelope then I will send another check. I hate to break this bad news on you while you were all having fun, but I guess the taunting and the lying about my intentions will soon come to an end.

Tsk, tsk. You had a chance to prove your honor but you failed. My honor will be upheld by the fact that I kept my word and that Gen2rev WILL receive a check in good standing. I'm sorry that the last one was a bust, but that was a sore mistake and I paid for it by all the loser remarks that I got from Gen2rev, who I now believe is lower than a slime bucket.

Oh well, we all move on to better things.

The big question is: will it be cashable?

Didn't I read somewhere that Nameless wouldn't post until that issue was resolved? Or did I misunderstand or misremember something?

It's been resolved. I received the check today.

Since some posters have begun to dominate the newsgroup with posts about a certain alleged wager, of a repetitive nature, this is a note to indicate that certain administrative actions may be implemented to prevent activity that the moderator judges is unduly impacting the overall smooth functioning of the newsgroup.

In short, I have let you all 'have at it' for long enough. Drop the subject, please. The multiplicity of threads is posing problems for posters who use killfiles; posting activity that has this effect is considered (by me) to be abusive in nature and will be dealt with accordingly. Likewise, repetitive posting of the same material over and over is abusive in nature and will also be dealt with.

I thank the posters who have agreed in email to restrain themselves from continuing this subject. Those who insist on abusive posting will be subject to administrative action until they learn to control their posting behavior.

Thank you for your compliance in this matter.

DIG, I have not participated in that topic. I find it silly and a waste. That said, I find it a touch disturbing that you have made this threat. Could you please present a bit more justification for your action? We have plenty of silly off-topic nonsense in t.o. I admit to having engaged in more than my share (though my share is way to large anyway). Isn't that the t.o way?

My primary concern is twofold:

1) thread morphing is defeating people's killfiles on less flexible ISP's and newsreaders;

2) posters are verging on mass-reposting of the same post over and over again in tit-for-tat 'cascades'. (Breidbart Inde)

I have acted in the past when the two above issues have arisen in other contexts. Again, I don't really care about the bet, personally, even though I posted for the first and last time on the subject today. My issues are that the posters in the thread are behaving in a way I have previously held to be abusive to the newsgroup itself.

Again, it could be about evolution, nazis or the IPU. The subject is not the crux here, it is thread morphing and repetitive posts. Both are abusive, in my book, and I've blocked posters for doing both in the past, and I expect idiots will force me to do so again in the future. For some reason people can't keep the argument in a single, killfilable thread.

At present I have done nothing to enforce anything. I would hope that posters will undertake to review their own posting habits and the behavior will stop.

No matter what I bring up, the Gen2rev tribe, all having the same voices like a big sucking sock puppet, evade every point that I make. A judge will look at this and ask, "why are you evading the questions?"

In particular, a judge will look at how the bet STARTED. If there is no proof that a bet was made and accepted by two individuals from the beginning, suspicion will be cast. Here are the points that I will be snipped and avoided:

Stop this behavior, now.

... It's time for Gen2rev and Dana Tweedy and others to say sorry right now.

This is your second personal warning to stop this behaviour of creating multiple threads to avoid killfiles.

You will not get another.

Thanks for the idea. I didn't know that you could evade a kill file by creating another thread. But I think that you're really mad at the fact that I've shown that even Dana Tweedy acknowledged the fact that I "didn't even try" the bet with Gen2rev.

Greig,

Maybe it's time that I came down hard on you. Evidence shows that multiple threads came against me, and you did nothing. And when I had created some, then you took action. Kettle and pot.

Responding to Greig's December 2 request to drop the subject

Have you told said individuals to quit answering everyone of my posts with the statements "you owe Gen2rev, pay up."

As always, you miss the point.

Most other people have, in fact stopped.

The real problem was starting so many new threads- which was done almost entirely by you.