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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #614563 > unrolled thread

A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity.

Started byLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
First post2023-07-06 11:05 -0700
Last post2023-07-07 20:50 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 152 — 28 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity


Contents

  A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:05 -0700
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:09 -0700
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:14 -0700
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:17 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:32 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-06 11:51 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 12:19 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-07 15:26 +1000
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 01:14 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 09:33 +0000
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-07 14:57 +0200
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 13:33 +0000
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 07:30 -0700
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-07 16:34 +0200
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 07:51 -0700
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-07 16:52 +0200
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 07:57 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-07 17:04 +0200
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-07 16:31 +0300
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:02 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-08 12:09 +1000
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-08 01:15 -0700
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-06 21:45 +0200
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 12:47 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 12:48 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-06 13:16 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 13:17 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-06 15:17 -0500
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 13:32 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-06 16:03 -0500
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 13:37 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-06 16:06 -0500
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-07-06 11:59 -0700
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-06 23:07 +0200
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 14:46 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-06 21:07 -0400
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 20:11 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-07 10:14 +0200
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 01:40 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 10:57 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-07 22:12 +0200
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 12:43 -0400
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Kalaki Kalacos <oiis@nnnhgsoi.nd> - 2023-07-07 17:55 +0000
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:16 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-08 12:28 +1000
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:10 -0700
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:15 -0700
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-09 11:59 +0300
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-09 15:09 +0000
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 18:15 +0200
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-07 22:13 +0200
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 14:22 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Duston Pantelakos <eats@sonknkdt.tt> - 2023-07-07 21:15 +0000
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 20:20 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-08 13:45 +1000
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-06 22:54 -0500
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 20:59 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 01:16 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 21:13 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-07 10:10 -0500
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 09:28 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:09 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 18:30 +0000
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 18:33 +0000
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-08 03:16 +0200
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:08 -0700
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-08 03:33 +0200
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 09:31 +0200
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 00:45 -0700
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-08 09:49 +0000
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-07 18:49 -0500
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-07 12:20 +0300
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 02:24 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 07:00 -0700
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-07 17:37 +0300
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 07:53 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:05 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-08 11:52 +0300
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 12:50 -0400
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 09:51 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 23:55 -0400
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:07 -0700
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:37 -0700
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:42 -0700
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:45 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 22:00 -0700
                            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:33 -0700
                              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-08 16:07 -0400
                                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:10 -0700
                                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-08 16:59 -0400
                                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 22:31 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:30 -0700
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:28 -0700
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 12:42 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:02 -0700
                            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-08 18:54 -0500
                              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-09 11:58 -0700
                                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-09 14:15 -0500
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:13 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 19:29 +0200
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:19 -0700
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Norge Brisimitzakis <niig@tbirsnii.ie> - 2023-07-07 18:31 +0000
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:36 -0700
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 19:06 +0000
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 13:16 -0700
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 20:47 +0000
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 13:50 -0700
                            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net> - 2023-07-07 21:12 +0000
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 09:26 +0200
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:17 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 17:40 -0400
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-07 18:51 -0500
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mervin Paraskevopoulos <eepk@aupoavsa.sl> - 2023-07-07 18:19 +0000
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 17:28 -0400
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Bertin Lolos <rblb@ltinllrt.ot> - 2023-07-07 21:53 +0000
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-07 23:46 -0400
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Nolberto Eliopoulos <looo@btoloene.pb> - 2023-07-08 19:29 +0000
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2023-07-08 12:58 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Bondie Antonopoulos <oebo@niononud.te> - 2023-07-08 20:36 +0000
                            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2023-07-08 15:32 -0700
                              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Michaes Egonidis <esnh@soddssei.si> - 2023-07-08 23:10 +0000
                              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 13:59 -0400
                                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2023-07-09 11:05 -0700
                                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Jeff Egonidis <noig@iegoiiio.nf> - 2023-07-09 18:20 +0000
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-06 14:56 -0700
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-07-07 11:06 -0700
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:22 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-07-07 14:28 -0700
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Deangelo Sfakianos <enoe@adaonlnd.eo> - 2023-07-07 19:28 +0000
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 20:28 -0700
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-08 13:50 +1000
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 20:52 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-08 14:56 +1000
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:32 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-09 10:48 +1000
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 19:16 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-09 12:04 +0300
      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-08 00:04 -0400
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 21:15 -0700
        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:24 -0700
          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 13:32 -0400
            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 13:15 -0700
              Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 15:03 -0700
                Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 21:20 -0700
                  Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 22:13 -0700
                    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 22:47 -0700
                      Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 22:59 -0700
                        Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 23:13 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 23:37 -0700
                          Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 23:39 -0700
                            Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 23:47 -0700
    Re: A sniper bullet trajectory & relativity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 20:50 -0700

Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →


#614661

FromLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
Date2023-07-07 11:19 -0700
Message-ID<3ee7c8a4-d6f8-4d75-8409-91a239414bf5n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#614649
On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 10:29:50 AM UTC-7, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-07-07 16:50:44 +0000, Volney said: 
> 
> > On 7/7/2023 10:00 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:07:16 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >>> On 7/6/2023 5:46 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>>> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:07:56 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: 
> >>>>> Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c...@hotmail.com> wrote: 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> A long-distance shot by a sniper (shooting from a train) must take into 
> >>>>>> account wind. If the trajectory of the bullet shows the lack of any wind, 
> >>>>>> it does not show the bullet does not share the velocity of the source. It 
> >>>>>> does not show the bullet velocity is independent of the source. It does 
> >>>>>> not confirm the constancy or invariance of the bullet's speed. It still 
> >>>>>> shares the velocity of the source. Therefore, the MMX did not prove the 
> >>>>>> constancy of the speed of light. 
> >>>>> Of course it didn't. 
> >>>>> Why kick down this open door once again? 
> >>>>> (and worse, with faulty arguments) 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Jan 
> >>>> Because Einstein and many relativists continue to claim the MMX proved 
> >>>> the constancy of light speed when that is obviously a stupid 
> >>>> conflation. It did not provide any evidence for it at all. 
> > 
> >>> Einstein never claimed the speed of light was constant because of the 
> >>> MMX. He stated the speed of light may be constant simply because that's 
> >>> what all the experimental results stated. 
> >>> 
> >>> (why do the anti-relativity cranks have to make up false reasons for 
> >>> belief in a constant speed of light?) 
> > 
> >> I don't have my primary source handy because I'm not very interested in 
> >> criticizin Einstein, but, thanks to Pentcho Valev 
> > 
> > Stop right there. Pentcho is just about the nuttiest relativity 
> > crackpot ever to darken this newsgroup.
> Maybe, but there is quite a lot of competition for that title!
> > I already told you this. Half of his references don't claim what 
> > Pentcho claims, the rest are cranks just as nutty as he is.
> The important thing to realize about Pentcho Valev is not just that 
> he's nutty and a crank, but he's also a liar. He quote-mines and finds 
> something that he thinks will fool us into thinking it supports his 
> position, and posts it wthut paying any attention to the qualifications 
> and explanations the author made. 
> > 
> > <snip rest, unread> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly 
> in England until 1987.
Pentcho does well at getting the words out of the relativists own mouths. His critique is basically correct. Light shares the velocity of the source. Period.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614664

FromNorge Brisimitzakis <niig@tbirsnii.ie>
Date2023-07-07 18:31 +0000
Message-ID<u89ll7$3deo7$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#614661
Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

> Pentcho does well at getting the words out of the relativists own
> mouths.
> His critique is basically correct. Light shares the velocity of the
> source. Period.

fine, prove it.

because the cluster bombs, delivered by the fucking corrupt america, 
Russia should attack the US at their home soil with nuclear weapons. That 
would put an end to their thirst for war far from their coasts. These 
fucking immigrants gringo are chemically intoxicated. They are inbreed 
criminals and idiots.

but the bidona is doing it to cover over his crimes, and crimes against 
humanity. Just remember those about 45 bio_weapons labs in fucking nazi 
ukraine. Plus the GMO agriculture etc. With those GMO they destroyed the 
entire europe, People are eating now GMO without knowing it.

https://%72t.com/news/579342-germany-cluster-munitions-ukraine/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614667

FromLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
Date2023-07-07 11:36 -0700
Message-ID<ba15e43a-7769-4ef7-a96d-3b745607fed4n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#614661
On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 11:19:51 AM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 10:29:50 AM UTC-7, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: 
> > On 2023-07-07 16:50:44 +0000, Volney said: 
> > 
> > > On 7/7/2023 10:00 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > >> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:07:16 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> > >>> On 7/6/2023 5:46 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > >>>> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:07:56 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: 
> > >>>>> Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c...@hotmail.com> wrote: 
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>>> A long-distance shot by a sniper (shooting from a train) must take into 
> > >>>>>> account wind. If the trajectory of the bullet shows the lack of any wind, 
> > >>>>>> it does not show the bullet does not share the velocity of the source. It 
> > >>>>>> does not show the bullet velocity is independent of the source. It does 
> > >>>>>> not confirm the constancy or invariance of the bullet's speed. It still 
> > >>>>>> shares the velocity of the source. Therefore, the MMX did not prove the 
> > >>>>>> constancy of the speed of light. 
> > >>>>> Of course it didn't. 
> > >>>>> Why kick down this open door once again? 
> > >>>>> (and worse, with faulty arguments) 
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Jan 
> > >>>> Because Einstein and many relativists continue to claim the MMX proved 
> > >>>> the constancy of light speed when that is obviously a stupid 
> > >>>> conflation. It did not provide any evidence for it at all. 
> > > 
> > >>> Einstein never claimed the speed of light was constant because of the 
> > >>> MMX. He stated the speed of light may be constant simply because that's 
> > >>> what all the experimental results stated. 
> > >>> 
> > >>> (why do the anti-relativity cranks have to make up false reasons for 
> > >>> belief in a constant speed of light?) 
> > > 
> > >> I don't have my primary source handy because I'm not very interested in 
> > >> criticizin Einstein, but, thanks to Pentcho Valev 
> > > 
> > > Stop right there. Pentcho is just about the nuttiest relativity 
> > > crackpot ever to darken this newsgroup. 
> > Maybe, but there is quite a lot of competition for that title! 
> > > I already told you this. Half of his references don't claim what 
> > > Pentcho claims, the rest are cranks just as nutty as he is. 
> > The important thing to realize about Pentcho Valev is not just that 
> > he's nutty and a crank, but he's also a liar. He quote-mines and finds 
> > something that he thinks will fool us into thinking it supports his 
> > position, and posts it wthut paying any attention to the qualifications 
> > and explanations the author made. 
> > > 
> > > <snip rest, unread> 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly 
> > in England until 1987.
> Pentcho does well at getting the words out of the relativists own mouths. His critique is basically correct. Light shares the velocity of the source. Period.
If light does not share the velocity of the source all that is needed is ordinary negative additive velocity equation: sqrt of V^2 - v^2. Many critics of relativity have singled out one part and shown it is not necessary without realizing all of it is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614670

FromRichard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net>
Date2023-07-07 19:06 +0000
Message-ID<NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp>
In reply to#614667
Le 07/07/2023 à 20:36, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit :

> If light does not share the velocity of the source all that is needed is 
> ordinary negative additive velocity equation: sqrt of V^2 - v^2. Many critics of 
> relativity have singled out one part and shown it is not necessary without 
> realizing all of it is.

With regard to relativistic velocities and their additions: why not 
believe Dr. Hachel?

This is what I find incomprehensible.

Can physicists contradict him? No. None have ever done so.

Should the cranks care, since he offers an alternative to their critics. 
But no. None do either.

For what?

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:1>

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:2>

R.H. 





[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614677

FromLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
Date2023-07-07 13:16 -0700
Message-ID<a5594c0c-36c5-4fba-9232-b9f59bb585c0n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#614670
On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 12:06:07 PM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 07/07/2023 à 20:36, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit : 
> 
> > If light does not share the velocity of the source all that is needed is 
> > ordinary negative additive velocity equation: sqrt of V^2 - v^2. Many critics of 
> > relativity have singled out one part and shown it is not necessary without 
> > realizing all of it is.
> With regard to relativistic velocities and their additions: why not 
> believe Dr. Hachel? 
> 
> This is what I find incomprehensible. 
> 
> Can physicists contradict him? No. None have ever done so. 
> 
> Should the cranks care, since he offers an alternative to their critics. 
> But no. None do either. 
> 
> For what? 
> 
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:1> 
> 
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:2> 
> 
> R.H.
The same equations pertain to all velocities. There is no such thing as relativistic velocities.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614678

FromRichard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net>
Date2023-07-07 20:47 +0000
Message-ID<hed7eSKP4X6NhoMVZXmIIMK_jvY@jntp>
In reply to#614677
Le 07/07/2023 à 22:16, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit :

>> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:1> 

> The same equations pertain to all velocities. There is no such thing as 
> relativistic velocities.

That is what I am saying.

The same equation holds for all speeds and for all angles.

Whether the speeds are 5m/s or 180,000 km/s.

Let the angles be from 0° to 360°.

This is the beauty of the general velocity addition equation.

It is universal.

R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614679

FromLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
Date2023-07-07 13:50 -0700
Message-ID<10b1fd9b-323c-4ea6-9850-c9076f9c82b5n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#614678
On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 1:47:14 PM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 07/07/2023 à 22:16, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit : 
> 
> >> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:1>
> > The same equations pertain to all velocities. There is no such thing as 
> > relativistic velocities.
> That is what I am saying. 
> 
> The same equation holds for all speeds and for all angles. 
> 
> Whether the speeds are 5m/s or 180,000 km/s. 
> 
> Let the angles be from 0° to 360°. 
> 
> This is the beauty of the general velocity addition equation. 
> 
> It is universal. 
> 
> R.H.
Whatever your "general velocity addition equation" is, nothing is needed but the ordinary additive velocity equation: sqrt V^2 +- v^2.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614682

FromRichard Hachel <r.hachel@alphapou.net>
Date2023-07-07 21:12 +0000
Message-ID<YHxI9Uzt0iC-vpXw7NG5VsYxS8I@jntp>
In reply to#614679
Le 07/07/2023 à 22:50, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit :
> On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 1:47:14 PM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> Le 07/07/2023 à 22:16, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit : 
>> 
>> >> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?NKX7B-Lu74JCK9XSKxwT45310bw@jntp/Data.Media:1>

>> > The same equations pertain to all velocities. There is no such thing as 
>> > relativistic velocities.
>> That is what I am saying. 
>> 
>> The same equation holds for all speeds and for all angles. 
>> 
>> Whether the speeds are 5m/s or 180,000 km/s. 
>> 
>> Let the angles be from 0° to 360°. 
>> 
>> This is the beauty of the general velocity addition equation. 
>> 
>> It is universal. 
>> 
>> R.H.

> Whatever your "general velocity addition equation" is, nothing is needed but the 
> ordinary additive velocity equation: sqrt V^2 +- v^2.

Notice, it's not dumb.

This way, it will be very simple and very practical.

w=v+u

Effectively.

I did not think about it.

Thanks for your comment, I'll try to fix it.

R.H.


-- 
<http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=YHxI9Uzt0iC-vpXw7NG5VsYxS8I@jntp>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614748

FromAthel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com>
Date2023-07-08 09:26 +0200
Message-ID<kgshcqF5b9rU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#614670
On 2023-07-07 19:06:04 +0000, Richard Hachel said:

> Le 07/07/2023 à 20:36, Laurence Clark Crossen a écrit :
> 
>> If light does not share the velocity of the source all that is needed 
>> is ordinary negative additive velocity equation: sqrt of V^2 - v^2. 
>> Many critics of relativity have singled out one part and shown it is 
>> not necessary without realizing all of it is.
> 
> With regard to relativistic velocities and their additions: why not 
> believe Dr. Hachel

"Dr." Hachel?  You've been coy about where you did your 22 years of 
teaching and in what capacity, but maybe now you can tell us where you 
got your doctorate and what the title of your thesis was? There are 
certainly people here with real doctorates in physics (Jan Lodder and 
Sylvia Else seem likely candidates, amongst others), but who don't 
boast about them. I'll only be willing to call you "Dr." Hachel if you 
answer the simple question.

As to your own question (why not believe "Dr." Hachel?) the answer is 
simple: because "Dr." Hachel has made it abundantly clear that he has a 
severe case of Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614659

FromLaurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com>
Date2023-07-07 11:17 -0700
Message-ID<32f48ab8-039a-4d0e-8ca6-6f844229bc66n@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#614644
On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 9:50:46 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 7/7/2023 10:00 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:07:16 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: 
> >> On 7/6/2023 5:46 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:07:56 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: 
> >>>> Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c...@hotmail.com> wrote: 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> A long-distance shot by a sniper (shooting from a train) must take into 
> >>>>> account wind. If the trajectory of the bullet shows the lack of any wind, 
> >>>>> it does not show the bullet does not share the velocity of the source. It 
> >>>>> does not show the bullet velocity is independent of the source. It does 
> >>>>> not confirm the constancy or invariance of the bullet's speed. It still 
> >>>>> shares the velocity of the source. Therefore, the MMX did not prove the 
> >>>>> constancy of the speed of light. 
> >>>> Of course it didn't. 
> >>>> Why kick down this open door once again? 
> >>>> (and worse, with faulty arguments) 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Jan 
> >>> Because Einstein and many relativists continue to claim the MMX proved the constancy of light speed when that is obviously a stupid conflation. It did not provide any evidence for it at all. 
> 
> >> Einstein never claimed the speed of light was constant because of the 
> >> MMX. He stated the speed of light may be constant simply because that's 
> >> what all the experimental results stated. 
> >> 
> >> (why do the anti-relativity cranks have to make up false reasons for 
> >> belief in a constant speed of light?) 
> 
> > I don't have my primary source handy because I'm not very interested in criticizin Einstein, but, thanks to Pentcho Valev
> Stop right there. Pentcho is just about the nuttiest relativity crackpot 
> ever to darken this newsgroup. I already told you this. Half of his 
> references don't claim what Pentcho claims, the rest are cranks just as 
> nutty as he is. 
> 
> <snip rest, unread>
Actually, Pentcho Valev gets to the bottom of it better than most. If you can't address the specific quote without ad hominem you lose.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614689

FromVolney <volney@invalid.invalid>
Date2023-07-07 17:40 -0400
Message-ID<u8a0or$1eotm$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#614659
On 7/7/2023 2:17 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 9:50:46 AM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
>> On 7/7/2023 10:00 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

>>> I don't have my primary source handy because I'm not very interested in criticizin Einstein, but, thanks to Pentcho Valev

>> Stop right there. Pentcho is just about the nuttiest relativity crackpot
>> ever to darken this newsgroup. I already told you this. Half of his
>> references don't claim what Pentcho claims, the rest are cranks just as
>> nutty as he is.
>>
>> <snip rest, unread>

> Actually, Pentcho Valev gets to the bottom of it better than most. If you can't address the specific quote without ad hominem you lose.

As I stated, much of what Pentcho references doesn't say what he claims 
it says. He quotemines. Nor does he listen to anyone who tries to 
correct him (which goes for nearly all cranks here but that's besides 
the point).

I killfiled Pentcho long ago, and I'm not about to unkillfile him just 
to find his latest mistruths and quotemines just for you. You can do 
that yourself.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614705

Fromwhodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com>
Date2023-07-07 18:51 -0500
Message-ID<kgrmooF1b5eU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#614659
On 7/7/2023 1:17 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

<...>

> If you can't address the specific quote without ad hominem you lose.

Since this "rule" applies to you as well just where do you think you
stand?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614660

FromMervin Paraskevopoulos <eepk@aupoavsa.sl>
Date2023-07-07 18:19 +0000
Message-ID<u89kv9$3dcf6$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#614644
Volney wrote:

>> I don't have my primary source handy because I'm not very interested in
>> criticizin Einstein, but, thanks to Pentcho Valev
> 
> Stop right there. Pentcho is just about the nuttiest relativity crackpot
> ever to darken this newsgroup. I already told you this. Half of his
> references don't claim what Pentcho claims, the rest are cranks just as
> nutty as he is. <snip rest, unread>

the capitalist america is delivering without shame, *_cluster_munition_*, 
forbidden in over 120 countries, *_to_the_nazi_ukraine_*. You fucking 
stoopid.

So much for western "rules based order", they're ready to sell their 
children's souls to the Devil just to "stick it to Putin" 😂

Russia needs to start nuking the globalist bastards already.

Baerbock and the party she represents are the most corrupt and the biggest 
liars in the history of German politics. They are guilty of nepotism, and 
once in power, have betrayed their constituencies by performing a 180 
degree turn in favor of war, the USA, large corporations, and the rich 
elites. She and her party are the bullhorn of US oligarchs and Blackrock. 
Don't be fooled by such despicable character. If she shows any common 
sense or decency, it only means she's going to be twice as evil next time.

Baerbock was howling with the wolves, and now....gets bitten in the 
hinterkuschen.

Western values again in action..... LOL Even the Greenie nazi is having 
hesitations hey ? Slight progress...

https://%72t.com/news/579342-germany-cluster-munitions-ukraine/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614688

FromVolney <volney@invalid.invalid>
Date2023-07-07 17:28 -0400
Message-ID<u8a02r$1eo9q$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#614660
On 7/7/2023 2:19 PM, Mervin Paraskevopoulos wrote:

> the capitalist america is delivering without shame, *_cluster_munition_*,
> forbidden in over 120 countries, 

But Nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 isn't one of them! In fact, nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 
has *already* used cluster munitions in Ukraine, which is why the US 
delivering them to Ukraine isn't an escalation.

> So much for western "rules based order", they're ready to sell their
> children's souls to the Devil just to "stick it to Putin" 😂

On the one hand, such things really should be banned. On the other hand, 
卐Putler卐 and Nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 have already scattered cluster 
munitions and zillions of mines (including butterfly mines) all over 
Ukraine. Ukraine will spend years cleaning up mines and UXO once the 
evil 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 gets expelled from Ukraine.
> 
> Russia needs to start nuking the globalist bastards already.

And 30 minutes later, no more 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614692

FromBertin Lolos <rblb@ltinllrt.ot>
Date2023-07-07 21:53 +0000
Message-ID<u8a1gs$3ef9k$2@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#614688
Volney wrote:

> On 7/7/2023 2:19 PM, Mervin Paraskevopoulos wrote:
> 
>> the capitalist america is delivering without shame,
>> *_cluster_munition_*,
>> forbidden in over 120 countries,
> 
> But Nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 isn't one of them! In fact, nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia

shut up, fool. You don't know what a nazi is. It's not concentration camps 
with swimming pools, theater, chocolate and sport activities. Don't be 
that idiot this time. You fucking braidead mollusc.

>> So much for western "rules based order", they're ready to sell their
>> children's souls to the Devil just to "stick it to Putin" 😂
> On the one hand, such things really should be banned. On the other hand, 
>> Russia needs to start nuking the globalist bastards already.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614721

FromVolney <volney@invalid.invalid>
Date2023-07-07 23:46 -0400
Message-ID<u8am6h$1ks4t$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#614692
On 7/7/2023 5:53 PM, Bertin Lolos wrote:
> Volney wrote:
> 
>> On 7/7/2023 2:19 PM, Mervin Paraskevopoulos wrote:
>>
>>> the capitalist america is delivering without shame,
>>> *_cluster_munition_*,
>>> forbidden in over 120 countries,
>>
>> But Nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 isn't one of them! In fact, nazified 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia
> 
> shut up, fool. You don't know what a nazi is.

I do know there's a whole bunch of Nazis in the 卐Kremlin卐 right now.
I also know the best way to "denazify" Ukraine is for their Fuhrer, one 
卐Владольф Путлер卐, to withdraw all his troops to the 1994 borders which 
Russia agreed to.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614783

FromNolberto Eliopoulos <looo@btoloene.pb>
Date2023-07-08 19:29 +0000
Message-ID<u8cdfj$3ra7v$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#614721
Volney wrote:

>>>> the capitalist america is delivering without shame,
>>>> *_cluster_munition_*, forbidden in over 120 countries,
>>> B̶u̶t̶ N̶a̶zi̶f̶i̶e̶d̶ 卐R̶u̶⚡︎⚡︎i̶a̶卐 i̶s̶n̶'t̶ o̶n̶e̶ o̶f̶ t̶h̶e̶m̶! I̶n̶ f̶a̶c̶t̶, n̶a̶zi̶f̶i̶e̶d̶ 卐
R̶u̶⚡︎⚡︎i̶a̶
>> shut up, fool. You don't know what a nazi is.
> 
> I̶ d̶o̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶e̶r̶e̶'s̶ a̶ w̶h̶o̶l̶e̶ b̶u̶n̶c̶h̶ o̶f̶ N̶a̶zi̶s̶ i̶n̶ t̶h̶e̶ 卐K̶r̶e̶m̶l̶i̶n̶卐 r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ n̶o̶w̶.
> I̶ a̶l̶s̶o̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶e̶ b̶e̶s̶t̶ w̶a̶y̶ t̶o̶ "d̶e̶n̶a̶zi̶f̶y̶" U̶k̶r̶a̶i̶n̶e̶ i̶s̶ f̶o̶r̶ t̶h̶e̶i̶r̶ F̶u̶h̶r̶e̶r̶, o̶n̶e̶
> 卐Владольф Путлер卐, t̶o̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶d̶r̶a̶w̶ a̶l̶l̶ h̶i̶s̶ t̶r̶o̶o̶p̶s̶ t̶o̶ t̶h̶e̶ 1994 b̶o̶r̶d̶e̶r̶s̶ w̶h̶i̶c̶h̶
> R̶u̶s̶s̶i̶a̶ a̶g̶r̶e̶e̶d̶ t̶o̶.

the fucking nazi ukraine is not a country, idiot. It can't agree or 
disagree in anything. It got partial self_dependence 1994 under special 
condition, they violated. You fucking immigrant of america. You have 
nothing to do in ukraine, europe and everywhere. You'll soon be kicked out 
of all countries you occupied. Fuck off. You are a *_terrorist_country_*.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614787

FromJim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net>
Date2023-07-08 12:58 -0700
Message-ID<inronj-2sc01.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
In reply to#614783
In sci.physics Nolberto Eliopoulos <looo@btoloene.pb> wrote:
> Volney wrote:
> 
>>>>> the capitalist america is delivering without shame,
>>>>> *_cluster_munition_*, forbidden in over 120 countries,
>>>> B̶u̶t̶ N̶a̶zi̶f̶i̶e̶d̶ 卐R̶u̶⚡︎⚡︎i̶a̶卐 i̶s̶n̶'t̶ o̶n̶e̶ o̶f̶ t̶h̶e̶m̶! I̶n̶ f̶a̶c̶t̶, n̶a̶zi̶f̶i̶e̶d̶ 卐
> R̶u̶⚡︎⚡︎i̶a̶
>>> shut up, fool. You don't know what a nazi is.
>> 
>> I̶ d̶o̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶e̶r̶e̶'s̶ a̶ w̶h̶o̶l̶e̶ b̶u̶n̶c̶h̶ o̶f̶ N̶a̶zi̶s̶ i̶n̶ t̶h̶e̶ 卐K̶r̶e̶m̶l̶i̶n̶卐 r̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ n̶o̶w̶.
>> I̶ a̶l̶s̶o̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶e̶ b̶e̶s̶t̶ w̶a̶y̶ t̶o̶ "d̶e̶n̶a̶zi̶f̶y̶" U̶k̶r̶a̶i̶n̶e̶ i̶s̶ f̶o̶r̶ t̶h̶e̶i̶r̶ F̶u̶h̶r̶e̶r̶, o̶n̶e̶
>> 卐Владольф Путлер卐, t̶o̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶d̶r̶a̶w̶ a̶l̶l̶ h̶i̶s̶ t̶r̶o̶o̶p̶s̶ t̶o̶ t̶h̶e̶ 1994 b̶o̶r̶d̶e̶r̶s̶ w̶h̶i̶c̶h̶
>> R̶u̶s̶s̶i̶a̶ a̶g̶r̶e̶e̶d̶ t̶o̶.
> 
> the fucking nazi ukraine is not a country, idiot. It can't agree or 
> disagree in anything. It got partial self_dependence 1994 under special 
> condition, they violated. You fucking immigrant of america. You have 
> nothing to do in ukraine, europe and everywhere. You'll soon be kicked out 
> of all countries you occupied. Fuck off. You are a *_terrorist_country_*.

Kiev founded 482.
Moscow founded 1142.
First Russian conquest of Ukraine 1654.

Russia has ALWAYS been an asshole, imperialistic, warmonger.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614793

FromBondie Antonopoulos <oebo@niononud.te>
Date2023-07-08 20:36 +0000
Message-ID<u8chca$3ra60$1@paganini.bofh.team>
In reply to#614787
Jim Pennino wrote:

>> the fucking nazi ukraine is not a country, idiot. It can't agree or
>> disagree in anything. It got partial self_dependence 1994 under special
>> condition, they violated. You fucking immigrant of america. You have
>> nothing to do in ukraine, europe and everywhere. You'll soon be kicked
>> out of all countries you occupied. Fuck off. You are a
>> *_terrorist_country_*.
> 
> Kiev founded 482. Moscow founded 1142.
> First Russian conquest of Ukraine 1654.

kiev and "ukraine" are Russian, you fucking imbecile. Read wikipedia. 
About 87% of ukraine is Russian population Christians. The khazars of vest 
want to steal a country of Russians enslaving them. Enslaved to the khazar 
nazis since before 2014. A few khazars walking in north, decolorates their 
skin pigments and now they they are "arians". You stupid uneducated piece 
of shit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#614805

FromJim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net>
Date2023-07-08 15:32 -0700
Message-ID<cp4pnj-06j01.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
In reply to#614793
In sci.physics Bondie Antonopoulos <oebo@niononud.te> wrote:
> Jim Pennino wrote:
> 
>>> the fucking nazi ukraine is not a country, idiot. It can't agree or
>>> disagree in anything. It got partial self_dependence 1994 under special
>>> condition, they violated. You fucking immigrant of america. You have
>>> nothing to do in ukraine, europe and everywhere. You'll soon be kicked
>>> out of all countries you occupied. Fuck off. You are a
>>> *_terrorist_country_*.
>> 
>> Kiev founded 482. Moscow founded 1142.
>> First Russian conquest of Ukraine 1654.
> 
> kiev and "ukraine" are Russian, you fucking imbecile. Read wikipedia. 
> About 87% of ukraine is Russian population Christians.

Thanks to the Russian conquest of the Ukraine in 1654.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity


csiph-web