Welcome to new member Fifer

Roger O'Keeffe · Post by **Roger O'Keeffe** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 11:27 am

Don't suppose there's any chance you're related to Michelle, is there?

(What is this obsession with scrawny women who tend to dress in black?)

_________________
An Pluiméir Ceolmhar

[ This Message was edited by: Roger O'Keeffe on 2003-02-20 12:28 ]

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 11:37 am

Yes, welcome, Fifer!

Roger, I think the two names are spelled differently, though that doesn't indicate lack of relation, as spellings are frequently known to change.

Easily_Deluded_Fool · Thu Feb 20, 2003 11:41 am

On 2003-02-20 12:27, Roger O'Keeffe wrote:
Don't suppose there's any chance you're related to Michelle, is there?

(What is this obsession with scrawny women who tend to dress in black?)

Obviously subscribes to the 'drool theory' re wet whistles

_________________
No whistles were harmed in the transmission of this communication.

[ This Message was edited by: Easily_Deluded_Fool on 2003-02-20 12:42 ]

Roger O'Keeffe · Post by **Roger O'Keeffe** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 11:54 am

Yes indeed Waldo, I was so aware, and even noticed that the first fansite that I found a suitable photo on mangages to mis-spell her name consistently throughout.

Well, OK, since you all insist, you can click on "quote" and check for yourselves:

By the way, as Pfeiffer does mean whistler, her exquisite Michellitude seems to be quite on topic.

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Thu Feb 20, 2003 1:45 pm

On 2003-02-20 12:27, Roger O'Keeffe wrote:
Don't suppose there's any chance you're related to Michelle, is there?

<img>poorly scanned bimbo with tartan skin</img>

(What is this obsession with scrawny women who tend to dress in black?)

_________________
An Pluiméir Ceolmhar

Smoking ol' Kif again, Roger ?

You've been living too close to Charleroi, old chap. C'mon : this kiddo-pie could be your grand-daughter...

_________________

Caribu-Belch* Low Whistling, quite Ltd

* Do not confuse with cheap copies! *

[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2003-02-20 18:12 ]

madfifer9 · Post by **madfifer9** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 12:54 am

Aww, you all are so kind to welcome me! Even though most of the posts relate to the Michelle type of (p)fifer. But sadly I'm no relation and don't look anything like Michelle.

Look here to compare:
http://www.fifedrum.org/album/index.cgi ... =dobbs.jpg

BTW, the pic is of Cpl Jack Dobbs, my alter ego.

Cheers, madfifer9

Roger O'Keeffe · Post by **Roger O'Keeffe** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 3:25 am

Have you met the other 8 madfifers, mfniner?

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 3:37 am

Now, let's see :
Bashful, Grumpy, Happy, Sleepy, Doc, Sneezy, Dopey, Keefy...

All here.

Pleased to meet you

Though I wonder if MamPfeiffer9 is really Snow White... Snort White maybe?

Roger O'Keeffe · Post by **Roger O'Keeffe** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 4:34 am

Who says the meaning of life is 42 anyway?

Quote:

Hollywood star Michelle Pfeiffer is officially the most beautiful woman in the world. Her facial features exactly match a complex 'beauty formula' drawn up by California plastic surgeon Dr. Stephen Marquardt. The doctor has worked out that the secret of true beauty is 1.618 - an equation which scientists have dubbed the PHI ratio. He's worked out the ideal width of a mouth is 1.618 times the width of the nose. And every human facial feature can be matched to the same ratio. Using these calculations the doctor has drawn up a 'perfect beauty' diagram and discovered that Michelle, 43, is the most beautiful.

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 8:57 am

Great evidence! Yeah, I can't recall how much bs has been already printed about art and this Phi proportion, aka "Golden rule"?
Some art schools old (or young) gurus still make a living out of this dogma, and still alledging "scientific evidence". They'll bring anything for proof; I heard already of the pyramids, Parthenon, sacred breeding of the bull-toads, but this third decimal on the length of Michaelle Fifer's nose beats them all!:razz:

Though I guess the dear Dr Roberts brings this out to sell face remodelling surgery...

Seriously (?) : I was asked by an art critic why I photographed so much in the last years in oblong framing (aka "panoramic" format). Since my printer and cameras don't really fit "pi" (3.14) proportion, I decided to explain it had to do with the kosmik exponential influence of number "e" (2,71828). It more than worked... it seems to catch on...
When you'll read similar claims in an art magazine on the other side of the Atlantic, you'll know where the original hoax came from

Paul Anderson · Post by **Paul Anderson** » Fri Feb 21, 2003 1:38 pm

Only a Dub would call that scrawny. Roger, you must be a northsider.