Quoted message said:Vera said:Cat--
We have accidents in Australia of individuals diving onto either rocks
or submerged trees in water. While the impact would cause brain
death, the fatality is always reported as a broken neck.
Trust me!
Vera
"Barbara's Cat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:George Dance, regarding his level of duckness, said:
Quoted message said:>quack
>expert
>quack
Quoted message said:--
Cm~
Quoted message said:"Everyone is entitled to be stupid,
but some abuse the privilege."
- anonymou
The cat is not arguing that hitting something will break your neck.
She is contending that diving, which she assumes is only the process
of being in the air free-falling, will not break your neck. She is
separating the idea of hitting, an object such as a rock, water, etc
from the act of diving. In other words she is trying to play with
language. The attempt is silly and depends of the definition that you
are using. If you assume that diving is the act of free falling
towards and object and hitting the object, then diving can break your
neck. If you assume that diving only involves free falling then, it
will not break your neck.
No sense in arguing, it is silly,
Andres
Gee, it's too bad you can't play with language, innit.
Freefalling onto/into an object that does/will not break your neck is
"diving."
Freefalling onto/into an object that does/will break your neck is
"committing suicide."
Freefalling onto/into a deadly object you didn't know was there is
called "really stupid."
Anybody who breaks his neck on the bottom of the shallow end of the
pool did not "break his neck diving," he "broke his neck hitting the
bottom."
Look it up.
Anybody who dives into UseNet sooner or later finds that he's hit the
shallow end of the gene pool, but he doesn't break /his own/ neck.
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
I do not "negotiate" for half my baby back, Solomon.
http://scrawlmark.org