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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #385769

Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries).

From moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries).
Date 2016-06-13 03:06 +0000
Organization The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
Message-ID <njl7vo$np1$1@pcls7.std.com> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <njfgh9$1i6l$1@gioia.aioe.org> <95ee528d-e233-4679-8ca1-c0e15701c1b3@googlegroups.com> <njid6t$1ntd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <njijo5$7gl$2@pcls7.std.com> <njjeoc$ukn$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


"HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes:

>On 12/06/16 13:08, Michael Moron-y wrote:
>> HGW <hw@...> writes:
>>

>>> Proper bullshit would not stump anybody.
>>
>>>> No answer? Stumped again?
>>
>>> Proper bullshit would not stump anybody.
>>
>> But the questions apparently all stumped you, Henry.  Does that mean that

Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge! You are just too stoopid to learn, aren't you, 
Ralph! Mr. Rabbidge, how many times do I keep having to tell you, Ralph 
Malcolm Rabbidge, not to mess with my quotes, Ralph?

>> you aren't an "anybody"? Are you an artificial intelligence program? I
>> really mean an artificial stupidity program, of course.

>One doesn't need artificial intelligence to know that Einstein's whole 
>theory is bullshit from start to finish and that those who still 
>conspire to maintain his name as the symbol of human genius are insipid 
>wimps.

But, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, so far nobody here has *ever* disproven any
part of Einstein's relativity, Ralph, no matter how many nutcases (such as
one Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge) whine about it here.  As far as myself, I 
don't care about Einstein as a person. And of course, neither do the laws
of physics, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge.  Ralph, if Einstein never existed, the
laws of relativity would still have been there, Ralph, waiting until 
someone (or likely, multiple someones) came along and discovered them,
some years or perhaps decades, after Einstein actually did.  Where would
we be today, Ralph?  By now, we'd have the equivalent of SR and GR, but
perhaps technology dependent on it would be delayed, Ralph.  Mr. Rabbidge,
perhaps now you'd be sitting there flaming about Mr. Smith's SR and Mr. 
Jones' GR while flailing away on a computer we'd consider to have 1980's
technology or something, as the semiconductor people try to understand
the effects of that new science, Ralph.  Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, that's
what I think we'd be seeing in a world which never had an Einstein.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-04 09:32 +1000
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 19:09 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 04:01 +1000
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:33 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 19:25 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 05:29 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 07:13 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 08:37 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 09:09 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:17 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 09:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-08 06:41 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 09:09 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-08 21:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:41 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 06:28 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-09 08:15 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:57 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 12:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-09 21:36 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 12:56 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-09 22:36 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-09 23:30 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 14:50 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:01 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 07:02 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 18:42 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:20 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 20:28 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:41 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 21:08 +0200
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:45 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-04 17:15 +1000
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-06 11:42 +1000
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-06 23:11 +1000
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 17:08 +0200
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 10:50 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 20:03 +0200
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 12:18 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 21:37 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 14:58 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-06 23:35 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 03:50 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 04:12 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 05:03 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 18:40 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 05:19 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 05:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 06:02 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 06:07 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:15 -0700
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 11:45 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-07 10:09 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 19:05 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:11 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 17:10 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-08 01:48 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 20:00 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:19 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:33 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 18:46 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 09:50 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 18:58 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:33 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:55 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-11 14:46 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-12 11:17 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-11 19:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 20:44 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 05:23 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:46 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 15:44 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:16 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-13 19:30 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-12 03:08 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 20:49 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-13 03:06 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:20 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-14 02:09 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-12 05:16 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:48 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-13 07:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:25 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 11:00 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-21 09:18 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-20 16:47 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-06 22:16 -0500
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-06 23:35 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 03:47 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:07 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 16:30 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 20:05 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:20 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:58 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 12:32 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-12 16:15 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:59 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 10:07 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-28 20:21 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-29 00:36 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 08:04 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-29 23:40 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 09:27 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 06:36 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 15:46 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 07:44 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 16:52 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 20:54 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 08:20 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-30 23:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 05:56 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:49 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-07-02 10:19 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 06:44 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 09:30 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 08:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 11:02 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-06-29 14:35 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-01 14:18 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 14:57 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 06:25 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:55 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-03 22:56 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 08:54 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-05 19:13 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 10:45 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-05 20:49 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 13:01 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-06 06:50 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 16:29 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-07 04:57 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-06 19:23 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 14:46 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-07 07:07 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 16:25 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-05 23:02 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 13:19 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-06 23:28 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 14:39 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-06 23:57 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-09 07:40 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-07-05 21:44 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 06:04 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-10 09:03 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 07:13 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:18 -0500
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:52 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 19:01 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 20:55 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:51 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:51 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:21 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 20:44 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 20:46 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:09 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 17:01 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 07:17 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:21 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:48 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:03 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 19:56 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:18 -0500
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 07:21 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:45 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 19:26 +1000
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kkhrapko@gmail.com - 2016-06-09 09:57 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kkhrapko@gmail.com - 2016-06-09 10:01 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:04 -0700
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 08:21 +1000
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 15:47 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:30 +1000
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Neil <Neil@inethub.org> - 2016-06-14 00:12 +0000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-15 05:32 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 12:58 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). astrofoton@interia.pl - 2016-07-08 12:25 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-12 04:45 +1000

csiph-web