Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht
oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist
and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae.

The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm.
Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a
wlohe.

Siquz....

lol thats funny. i could read the whole post with out a prob so i guess its true :thumb

Counter-argument:

"Nreuuoms pmeeononnhs peossss uiapocmltecnd etaaoilxnpn; nwttdtsniinoahg, the pdseuo-snfiiiectc spssliiimtm is not snfiiiectc and eieecndvs are oetfn mdanleiisg"

I've seen this before. Each time reading it without tripping up once. Which says something since normally I'm arse about when reading sentences:o

http://www.bisso.com/ujg_archives/000228.html 

PMSL....ok Andrew....you win.

WTF did you say?

Squiz....

“Numerous phenomenons possess uncomplicated explanation; notwithstanding, the pseudo-scientific simplistism is not scientific and evidences are often misleading”.

...someone has too much time online....

This one is an oldie but a goodie. I've received it about 50+ times since September, but I never tire of seeing it.

It's like a gift that keeps on giving, like herpes.

http://www.snopes.com/language/apocryph/cambridge.asp 

Andrew