Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #377654

Re: The Rule Of 72

Path csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date Fri, 23 Jun 2017 12:11:57 -0500
Message-ID <594D4BD8.5512@ix.netcom.com> (permalink)
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:11:52 -0700
From The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To starmaker@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
MIME-Version 1.0
Newsgroups sci.math, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity, rec.arts.sf.written, alt.astronomy
Subject Re: The Rule Of 72
References <59441500.660A@ix.netcom.com> <oi5q6q$1oip$1@gioia.aioe.org> <PM0005523BFFEC5FCC@aca43d4d.ipt.aol.com> <59441500.660A@ix.netcom.com> <Pine.NEB.4.64.1706180046100.4820@panix5.panix.com> <59441500.660A@ix.netcom.com> <Pine.NEB.4.64.1706180046100.4820@panix5.panix.com> <59441500.660A@ix.netcom.com> <Pine.NEB.4.64.1706180046100.4820@panix5.panix.com> <oi5q6q$1oip$1@gioia.aioe.org> <PM0005523BFFEC5FCC@aca43d4d.ipt.aol.com> <oi6hiq$2p5$1@dont-email.me> <PM0005524F97315FF5@aca4299c.ipt.aol.com> <59480DFB.46CB@ix.netcom.com> <PM0005526355C9A503@aca43d9f.ipt.aol.com> <594930F4.7BE0@ix.netcom.com> <PM000552780B86337B@aca4471d.ipt.aol.com> <594AC6AE.7D61@ix.netcom.com> <PM0005528BCC8E56E9@aca43d4a.ipt.aol.com> <594BE91A.543A@ix.netcom.com> <PM0005529F3D0AE111@aca4473b.ipt.aol.com>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Antivirus Avast (VPS 170623-2, 06/23/2017), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status Clean
Lines 63
X-Usenet-Provider http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host 108.219.229.47
X-Trace sv3-s7y/bitRIh0i5tZAI+CvhZTt8JX9PMyxQ5pTo0YSEwqZBojBVqbhluqURirxL+ihMvoveEw94PwpWSi!NllzjKN5D0NBJ4WHZ0thQhFSr3RFubWQB/2Xlt64++u//ytOxYZDKYK703cmJenHL5piLFvmBwvD!AFvnSmxFfFo=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes 3527
Xref csiph.com sci.math:377654 sci.physics:637449 sci.physics.relativity:423327 rec.arts.sf.written:473767 alt.astronomy:291621

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

jmfbahciv wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > jmfbahciv wrote:
> >>
> >> The Starmaker wrote:
> >> > jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> The Starmaker wrote:
> >> >> > jmfbahciv wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> [some newsgroups elided]
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Well, if that is the case then the speed of light should read:
> >> 299,792,459
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > somebody must have made a mistake somewhere...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > (i was wondering how that "8" got in there...)
> >> >>
> >> >> The fact that you didn't read anything I wrote is noted.
> >> >>
> >> >> /BAH
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > i think you said it was numerlogy and not an accounting trick, so...it's
> all
> >> about the number "9" in the
> >> > world of numerology.
> >>
> >> That's not what I wrote.  Your flip flopped when it shouldh't have.
> >>
> >> <snip nonsense>
> >>
> >> /BAH
> >
> >
> > Well, here is what you wrote:
> >
> > "I'm not talking about numerology.  I'm talking about real accounting
> >  and bookkeeping practices."
> 
> Do you know what the word "not" means?
> 
> hmmm...perhaps this is the cause of all the confusion you have in
> your posts.
> 
> /BAH


Well, I wasn't talking about "numerology" beforehand, ...but since You seem to recognize it as "numerology" then you
are stating it was ...numerology. 


I mean...that's How I read it, I don't know How You read it, I can only go by your words, not your intentions.

But...you're problably a Number person and not a Word person.


I'm not a Number person...

Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-16 10:27 -0700
  Re: The Rule Of 72 Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2017-06-16 11:05 -0700
  Re: The Rule Of 72 William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-06-18 00:46 -0700
    Re: The Rule Of 72 Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-18 07:03 -0500
      Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-18 13:21 +0000
        Re: The Rule Of 72 Jack Fearnley <jack@alcor.concordia.ca> - 2017-06-18 18:42 +0000
          Re: The Rule Of 72 Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-18 14:18 -0500
            Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-19 12:43 +0000
              Re: The Rule Of 72 Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-19 08:45 -0500
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-20 12:12 +0000
          Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-19 12:43 +0000
            Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-19 10:46 -0700
              Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-19 20:01 -0700
              Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-20 12:12 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-20 07:28 -0700
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-21 12:54 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-21 12:19 -0700
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-22 12:28 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-22 08:58 -0700
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-23 11:40 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-23 10:11 -0700
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-24 11:40 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-24 09:12 -0700
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-25 13:50 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 Jack Fearnley <jack@alcor.concordia.ca> - 2017-06-20 14:54 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-21 12:54 +0000
    Re: The Rule Of 72 djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-06-18 14:07 +0000
      Re: The Rule Of 72 David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2017-06-18 12:38 -0400
        Re: The Rule Of 72 djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-06-18 19:27 +0000
    Re: The Rule Of 72 "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-06-18 16:07 -0700

csiph-web