Comment by batch12

The parent makes a good point. Maybe I am jaded, but this isn't a scarily impressive feat of linguistics. It is mildly interesting that someone put the time into this. I would be impressed if it were done on a typewriter. Maybe this rewrite helps clarify the point.

  Do you think its possible
  you can be both right and
  wrong? The feat might not
  be as crazy as the author
  claims to think. I myself
  can think of many ways to
  achieve it. Come to think
  of it, it may actually be
  even easier because lines
  in that guide afford more
  ways to be broken because
  they are longer. I am not
  even a native speaker.