Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #423358

Re: The Rule Of 72

From	jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Newsgroups	sci.math, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: The Rule Of 72
Date	2017-06-24 11:40 +0000
Organization	"Have EDDT, will travel"
Message-ID	<PM000552B35C30858F@aca40855.ipt.aol.com> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <594AC6AE.7D61@ix.netcom.com> <PM0005528BCC8E56E9@aca43d4a.ipt.aol.com> <594BE91A.543A@ix.netcom.com> <PM0005529F3D0AE111@aca4473b.ipt.aol.com> <594D4BD8.5512@ix.netcom.com>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

The Starmaker wrote:
> 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.

But you were doing numerology in the text which has been elided; it was
a half-assed numerology rendition.

>
>
> 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.

No wonder you have problems in this newsgroup's topics.  I'm beginning
to understand how you think.
>
>
> I'm not a Number person...

/BAH

Thread

The Rule Of 72 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-06-16 10:27 -0700
  Re: The Rule Of 72 William Elliot <marsh@panix.com> - 2017-06-18 00:46 -0700
    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
    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 Valok Planek <lkupuu@kwklewan.oo> - 2017-06-24 11:46 +0000
                Re: The Rule Of 72 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-06-25 13:50 +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

csiph-web