ClairE Six and a half hours away is barely in the same state.

Take the Erie Canal to the Hudson. I'll meet you at the bottom.
staelth vator eegs 020531
Calculus Luver #46 Herd about Buffalo? It's snow secret. 021203
as Benson loo chee keong ,the dickhead plumber boss is a bastard child ,bought his degree from university of strathclyde.suck my dick loo chee keong! 040608
th benson loo chee keong is not a buffalo but a mother fucker ... 050927
th as ... how do you know this mother fucker benson? 050928
phil Actually... you can still fit more Buffalo and buffalo and buffalo in the sentence:

If Buffalo buffalo that Buffalo buffalo and buffalo also buffalo themselves, then:
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo."

By substituting different words we can keep the same sentence structure, but make it easier to read:
Wisconsin ducks [that] Wisconsin ducks hate [also] hate Wisconsin ducks [that] Wisconsin ducks hate

(insert a cute image of self hating duck I made) http://s229.photobucket.com/albums/ee61/fuctkard/?action=view¤t=Ducks.png

So we have 11 buffalo, however, a semi-colon combining two seperate sentences, could add more buffalo without stopping.

With the semicolon (;) you could say:
Those ducks hate those ducks that hate those ducks ; [and also] those ducks hate those ducks that hate those ducks.
(saying in addition that the other group of ducks feel the same way)

Look at the omition of the semicolon and quotes in the setence:
James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher..
This is accepted, and leads me to believe the"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo" could also be acceptable.

This is made possible by the interesting way the buffaloes doing the buffaloing are identified as buffalo that are buffaloed by buffalo, only, and leaves proper division of buffalo to be assumed by the reader.

We can substitute the word ducks for buffalo, or the word hate, but we can also substitute the word buffalo for buffalo.
Buffalo, the verb has two definitions; to bewilder, to intimidate; bewilder means to confuse or puzzle; intimdate means threaten; they are two entirely different meanings. Two seperate words, each could be used in the setence. Explaining another way the buffaloes may buffalo one another.

If 'buffalo could buffalo[confuse] buffalo, but also buffalo[intimidate] buffalo", a semicolon (;) could be used as conjunction instead of "but also", leaving buffalo as the only word in the sentence. Saying buffalo buffalo buffalo; buffalo buffalo buffalo. Without the need for more words.

How long you can go on using semicolons to explain how many different types of Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo would be ridiculous!

There are a lot of places in the world called Buffalo. There are rivers, cities, municipalities, etc. all called Buffalo, and isn't a Buffalo NY buffalo different from a Buffalo River buffalo, couldn't those buffalo also buffalo other buffalo from Buffalo differently?
In the U.S., for example, there are 18 cities named Buffalo. There are also 3 counties, 7 townships and abroad is a province in Canada and a City Municipality in Africa. Then of course there is also Buffalo bayou, river, creek, ridge, park, hills, speedway, state college, and university. In total there are clearly 39 different places for buffalo to be, with which you could definitely call the buffalo there Buffalo buffalo.

So each Buffalo buffalo would buffalo buffalo differently, and you would clarify with another addition about how those different buffalo buffalo, with a semicolon.

Much the same as in this example:
First prize was given to Jane Smervitz, Peoria, Illinois; second prize to Sam Frimpson, Duluth, Minnesota; third prize to Amber Ambleton, Oxnard, California.
You could use a semi-colon as many times as necessary.

There are also several distinct types of Buffalo, such as the Water buffalo (of southeast Asia), North American buffalo, and Cape (African) buffalo. And a water buffalo from Buffalo and a North American buffalo in Buffalo would buffalo different buffalo in different combinations. You can also have buffalo of different combinations of these buffalo types, all three different types, a single type, or two of the three types.

Also, if mascots dressed as buffalo came, they would be another entirely different use of the word buffalo. The mascots could be a type of buffalo. A Buffalo buffalo, as in North American buffalo mascots from Buffalo University or Cape buffalo mascots from Buffalo State College, etc.

By the way, the Buffalo [place] buffalo [mascots] would probably not be able to buffalo [intimidate] real buffaloes, but maybe they could buffalo [confuse] them. So with that included you could say the sentence another 27 ways, by meaning the mascots instead of the animals.

I have calculated thes permutations, we are up to a big number of ways, what type, and where buffalo etc. Each use of the word buffalo has different meanings as a verb, noun, or an adjective and each meaning can be substituted, and every possible combination of these substitutions create a sentence that can be related to clarify the previous sentence, with semicolon, but still all words would remain buffalo.
In other words you could go on saying buffalo buffalo bufallo.... buffalo buffalo while still having some meaning, within limits so large that you do not have to worry about it. I do not know the exact answer because it is hard to say exactly what combinations might or not work, but it is a sentence billions of buffalo long. (if you define a sentence as ending in a period)

There are enough buffalo in the world (you would need hundreds of thousands in total) to strategically place them (mainly in the U.S.) to make all those billions of statements possibly true.
what's it to you?
who go