Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #412260 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-09 07:08 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-03-29 16:22 -0700 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 36 participants
Thread has 1002 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1002 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 07:08 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 09:53 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 14:27 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 07:40 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 18:02 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-11 05:03 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 13:43 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 12:54 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 16:09 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 22:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 07:33 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 07:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 10:15 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 23:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 07:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 07:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 10:11 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 10:32 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 09:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 11:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 09:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 12:33 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-14 21:30 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 15:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 03:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 08:05 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-09 08:17 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 09:03 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 08:53 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-09 23:04 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 07:03 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Otplate Yuugaku <yu@yotwaglwt.pa> - 2017-03-10 15:08 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 13:56 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-09 23:37 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 15:08 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 07:54 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-10 19:23 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 14:36 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-09 19:47 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-10 18:48 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 04:53 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-11 06:08 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 06:52 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-11 07:38 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 12:05 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 05:48 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 07:49 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 06:13 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 08:30 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 06:59 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 09:04 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation Otplate Yuugaku <yu@yotwaglwt.pa> - 2017-03-10 15:10 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 11:20 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 15:43 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 14:40 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 16:54 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-12 06:51 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-12 15:55 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-12 11:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-13 04:51 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 05:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-13 17:15 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 11:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 13:38 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 20:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 07:51 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-15 00:04 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 16:15 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 06:13 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 09:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-13 15:20 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 11:13 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 13:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 19:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 07:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-14 06:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 08:42 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-14 06:53 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 09:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-14 14:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 16:30 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-15 07:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 10:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-16 06:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 08:59 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-17 06:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 11:32 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-15 19:25 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-16 06:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-14 23:57 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Priscilla Groll <lloi@wgnprlw.sl> - 2017-03-10 23:47 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 17:17 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-10 17:31 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 11:39 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-10 21:10 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-10 14:51 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 16:56 -0600
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 17:24 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-12 04:56 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-12 07:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-12 15:41 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-12 11:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 15:07 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-13 04:48 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-13 05:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-13 17:24 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 10:46 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 18:03 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-10 17:33 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 04:22 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 05:26 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 07:20 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 07:31 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 09:37 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-11 10:17 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 12:27 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-11 16:33 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 12:43 -0800
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-12 00:42 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 07:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-12 17:10 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 09:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-12 11:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 11:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-12 19:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 03:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-12 17:39 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 11:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-12 20:16 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 22:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-13 05:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 08:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-13 18:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 23:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 07:36 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 08:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 10:22 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 23:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 08:03 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 08:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 10:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 10:52 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 09:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 12:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 12:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 15:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 09:04 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 07:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 10:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 12:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 15:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 14:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 16:40 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 17:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-16 02:01 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 20:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 09:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 09:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 10:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:36 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 18:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 12:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 14:18 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 06:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 09:52 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-22 10:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-17 00:58 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 19:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 19:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 22:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-17 09:05 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-17 01:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:38 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 06:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-17 05:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-17 05:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 11:44 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 17:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:20 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-22 09:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-22 12:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 09:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 11:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-17 15:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-17 16:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Idimi Higame <iumia@igmwwad.hh> - 2017-03-18 00:08 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 03:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Idimi Higame <iumia@igmwwad.hh> - 2017-03-18 15:31 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 17:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 03:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-17 18:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 03:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-18 08:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 07:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Idimi Higame <iumia@igmwwad.hh> - 2017-03-18 15:27 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 08:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Idimi Higame <iumia@igmwwad.hh> - 2017-03-18 16:03 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-18 18:50 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-19 06:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 04:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-20 21:54 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-20 15:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 16:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-21 19:44 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 13:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 16:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 17:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-17 18:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 21:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-18 04:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-18 06:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-18 06:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 07:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:33 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 07:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-18 07:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 09:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-18 11:38 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-18 21:34 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 13:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-18 14:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-19 00:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-19 04:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-19 00:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:36 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:31 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 04:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-20 05:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 06:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 06:53 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 07:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-20 07:48 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 07:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-20 08:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 12:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-20 13:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 13:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 17:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 23:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 06:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 08:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 08:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 10:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 11:13 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Oretha Moorhead <traaho@maaodrd.oe> - 2017-03-21 18:35 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 12:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Oretha Moorhead <traaho@maaodrd.oe> - 2017-03-21 19:09 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 09:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 12:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 14:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 15:07 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 18:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 17:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 20:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 04:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 07:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-22 09:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 15:52 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 16:45 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 17:18 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 03:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 09:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 10:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 11:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 14:24 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:38 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 07:18 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 08:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 10:37 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 12:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 15:09 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 13:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 15:50 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 17:53 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 13:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 16:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 18:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-03-25 03:07 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 19:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 13:59 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 13:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 16:12 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 17:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-03-26 04:01 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 19:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 15:18 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 13:41 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:03 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 14:31 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:15 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 07:22 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-23 10:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 16:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 18:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 20:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-22 02:48 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 20:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-20 19:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 23:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 04:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 09:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 12:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 16:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-17 05:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-17 05:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-17 09:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 21:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 10:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 13:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 15:33 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 16:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 14:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 17:12 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 17:53 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 09:40 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 09:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:18 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 11:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 14:38 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-24 17:05 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 11:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-25 08:53 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-25 03:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 06:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-25 19:05 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 13:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 08:15 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 00:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-26 11:08 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 07:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-26 09:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 18:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-26 20:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 22:28 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-27 04:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 21:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 06:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 09:07 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 09:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 11:24 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Ottsuki Yo <ukuuu@kuuko.yc> - 2017-03-28 19:05 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 14:51 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:22 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-28 22:18 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Ottsuki Yo <ukuuu@kuuko.yc> - 2017-03-28 22:21 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 10:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:27 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 18:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 19:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-26 23:28 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 00:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-27 00:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 20:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 07:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-27 05:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 07:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 10:02 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 10:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 13:07 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 12:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 15:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 22:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 07:11 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 08:48 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 11:27 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:22 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 18:09 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 18:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:02 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:36 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 15:09 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 16:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 09:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 12:09 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 14:37 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 12:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 15:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 16:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkin_odd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 11:32 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 07:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 10:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 14:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 17:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 16:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkin_odd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 14:10 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 08:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 12:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 09:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 04:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:41 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 12:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 19:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 11:52 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 10:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:03 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 16:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:31 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:45 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 16:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 11:20 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:01 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 14:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 16:35 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 15:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 19:01 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 18:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 18:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 09:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 09:41 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 12:12 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 11:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 14:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 14:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 17:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 15:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-07 01:37 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 17:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 07:22 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 06:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 08:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 07:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 09:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 08:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 10:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 10:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 09:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 11:32 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 09:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 11:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 12:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:42 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 16:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 19:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 15:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 15:27 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 17:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 17:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 18:10 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 19:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 11:04 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-08 10:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 13:50 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 20:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:03 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 06:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:40 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:30 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:04 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:42 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Jolie Osokuro <uuol@oowo.ou> - 2017-04-10 17:55 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 11:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 09:57 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 09:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:45 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 22:07 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 08:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:41 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 09:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 09:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 08:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 22:20 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 19:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 17:15 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 19:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:10 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:38 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 12:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 19:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 14:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-15 23:44 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 16:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 22:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 23:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 07:45 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 08:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 18:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 18:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 07:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 08:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 04:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 08:11 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 05:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 08:42 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 07:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-23 16:15 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 08:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 17:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 16:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 20:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 07:48 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 16:20 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 08:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 22:15 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 19:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 07:54 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 04:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 13:42 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Heki Entouba <buububu@enou3eh.ac> - 2017-04-13 11:56 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 04:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:33 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 10:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 04:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 14:10 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 05:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Heki Entouba <buububu@enou3eh.ac> - 2017-04-13 12:28 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:38 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 14:34 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:24 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 14:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 23:41 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:51 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 14:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:31 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:50 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 14:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 07:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 08:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 09:02 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 09:20 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 09:07 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-10 21:37 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-10 21:55 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 08:14 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 06:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 10:30 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 01:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 14:48 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 06:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 16:22 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:02 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 09:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 22:04 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 07:47 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 22:00 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:28 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 07:44 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 08:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 15:35 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 07:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-10 22:04 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 08:16 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 06:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 16:08 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 16:48 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 09:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:35 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 22:19 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:48 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:30 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 07:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-11 21:57 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 14:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-04-12 06:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 06:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-04-12 07:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 17:53 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-04-12 17:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 19:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-04-13 04:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 04:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 14:29 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 05:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 11:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:07 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 09:40 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 09:09 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 10:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 13:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 22:47 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:13 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-13 21:47 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 23:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-14 08:17 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 23:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-14 11:50 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-14 18:08 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 14:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-15 02:53 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 19:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-15 10:36 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 07:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-15 16:43 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 10:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-15 23:32 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 16:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-16 13:14 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 07:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-16 17:34 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Emma Harmony <aymmmaeo@anownwrm.cm> - 2017-04-16 15:37 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-16 17:48 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Dusty Han <uaut@sdwduw.ut> - 2017-04-16 16:00 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 14:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 22:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 23:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 07:36 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 08:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 18:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 17:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 07:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 08:27 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 07:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 13:06 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 10:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:51 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 14:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 13:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 19:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 14:28 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-12 07:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:03 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 08:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 09:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 08:16 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 06:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:28 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:40 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:35 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:43 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:06 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:54 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 11:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:15 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:42 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 10:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 11:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 14:25 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 19:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 19:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 14:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 16:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-07 19:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 11:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 13:56 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-06 06:02 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation sdru.product@gmail.com - 2017-04-05 11:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:11 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 11:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:04 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:15 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-05 03:45 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 05:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:35 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 11:44 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:16 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 02:17 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 09:06 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 08:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 12:50 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 19:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-05 21:37 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 15:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 15:37 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 15:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 21:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkin_odd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 01:20 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 15:57 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 21:45 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 17:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkin_odd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 11:32 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 06:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 10:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 17:30 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 19:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:45 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 16:33 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkin_odd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 01:20 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation sdru.product@gmail.com - 2017-03-31 18:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 19:21 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 08:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:00 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 15:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 17:52 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-01 04:00 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 19:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 19:14 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 17:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-04 00:58 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 19:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 19:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 11:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 10:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:47 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:48 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:23 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:34 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:38 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 11:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:11 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:59 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 12:57 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 16:46 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 15:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 11:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 10:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 11:56 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 08:14 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 07:26 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 13:34 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 16:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:37 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 16:53 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:42 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 16:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 08:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 10:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 09:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-05 11:49 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 15:30 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-04 17:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-01 03:52 +0200
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 19:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 22:26 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Michiko Husband <nuknuuu@wmnkiin.hi> - 2017-03-27 22:01 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Michiko Husband <nuknuuu@wmnkiin.hi> - 2017-03-27 22:13 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Michiko Husband <nuknuuu@wmnkiin.hi> - 2017-03-27 22:17 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-28 21:10 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 22:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-28 21:09 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 14:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 21:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 07:13 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 08:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 11:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:09 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:35 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 15:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 18:11 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-27 04:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-27 05:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-27 08:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 10:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-27 14:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 22:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Ottsuki Yo <ukuuu@kuuko.yc> - 2017-03-28 18:50 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 07:19 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-27 21:52 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 21:07 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 07:21 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 09:04 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 11:23 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:01 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 17:17 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 16:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 09:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 08:36 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 15:09 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-31 09:55 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 04:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 13:37 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 11:54 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-03 10:24 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 21:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 10:28 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 10:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:24 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:07 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 14:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 12:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:05 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 07:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-23 21:27 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 16:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 10:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:27 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 18:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:02 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 12:06 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 14:26 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 17:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 19:39 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 20:49 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 09:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 10:52 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:31 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 16:44 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 19:00 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 18:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:08 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 15:29 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 10:58 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 09:24 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 12:38 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-13 20:05 +0100
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 23:48 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 08:07 -0500
Re: mutual relative time dilation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 13:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 13:27 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-21 21:15 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 14:43 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-23 21:28 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-23 15:22 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-03-24 17:04 +0000
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-12 13:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 10:48 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-13 11:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation alsor@interia.pl - 2017-03-14 13:58 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 16:03 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 16:29 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-17 09:46 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-17 09:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-17 12:55 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 11:50 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 13:20 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 14:12 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-19 12:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 10:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 12:40 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 09:59 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 15:25 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 15:32 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-21 16:08 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 16:37 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 09:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 09:44 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 10:05 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 14:31 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-22 16:19 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 18:09 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 18:18 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-24 18:10 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dickorrich@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 11:39 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation dickorrich@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 11:47 -0700
Re: mutual relative time dilation Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-29 15:26 +1100
Re: mutual relative time dilation numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-29 16:22 -0700
Page 16 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 50 Next page →
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 19:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <48e6db8c-54d7-462d-842a-6e6742ace21d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #414040 |
On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:07:05 PM UTC-7, Python wrote: > Robert Winn wrote: > > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 2:19:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > But then I try to sell you something, and you only have ridicule > > for my efforts. > > You always feel ridiculed in your effort Mr Winn. This is likely > not the fault of others, you know? Could you consider the hypothesis > that you *are* ridicule in the first place, that you are just an > unsufferable idiot, a crank, a idiot and a psychopath just building > paranoid ideas from the bad experience you had. All of this is > not supposed to be a burden to others, you know? So you say it is a great burden to you if someone uses the Galilean transformation equations. It is a great burden if you see someone working in a sawmill. It is a great burden if someone has a herd of cows. We are still waiting for the proof about the methane. You have the entire Bundy family in prison because they objected a little bit to the federal government stealing a million dollars worth of cattle from them. So then you tell me that my only opportunity in life is to become a salesman. So I become a salesman. But I did not try to sell something to you. I said that I would give you this great opportunity to be a sales representative for this company for free. I offered to put up the $20. No, you say, I am being a burden. I think the same pattern of intolerance and prejudice is to be seen in everything you say.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 13:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob6emk$1d14$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #414038 |
On 3/24/2017 8:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 2:19:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 3/24/2017 3:25 PM, Robert Winn wrote: >>>> There are wise choices, Robert, and there are passive-a... >>> Oh sure, blame me. Well, when that credit card ruins your life, just don't say I did not warn you. >> >> Well, Robert, just to be absolutely transparent on this, if you are >> unhappy with your situation at the age of 69, then yes, the blame rests >> with you. You are in control of every decision you make, and you have >> been ever since you got out of the Navy. This includes whatever put you >> in jail in 1992, the frivolous lawsuit you put to federal court about >> candidacy laws in Arizona which got chucked on its ear, how you have >> been employed and how much, and how much time you spend on the internet. >> >> And if I get in trouble because of a $35 charge on my credit card, you >> can bet that I will assume all the blame for that. >> > > Well, your idea was that I ruined your life because I was working in a sawmill. Robert, to be honest, you are incapable of ruining anyone's life but your own. On that front, you seem to have been spectacularly successful. > But if you think credit card companies are your friends, then, by all means, I would > say that you should choose your own friends. > But I would point out your hypocrisy. You tell me that I have no choice but to be > a salesman. Even my welding business was not good enough. But then I try to sell > you something, and you only have ridicule for my efforts. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 13:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <457f5bd4-05bf-4b3c-8d82-13fc93978908@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #414092 |
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/24/2017 8:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 2:19:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 3/24/2017 3:25 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > >>>> There are wise choices, Robert, and there are passive-a... > >>> Oh sure, blame me. Well, when that credit card ruins your life, just don't say I did not warn you. > >> > >> Well, Robert, just to be absolutely transparent on this, if you are > >> unhappy with your situation at the age of 69, then yes, the blame rests > >> with you. You are in control of every decision you make, and you have > >> been ever since you got out of the Navy. This includes whatever put you > >> in jail in 1992, the frivolous lawsuit you put to federal court about > >> candidacy laws in Arizona which got chucked on its ear, how you have > >> been employed and how much, and how much time you spend on the internet. > >> > >> And if I get in trouble because of a $35 charge on my credit card, you > >> can bet that I will assume all the blame for that. > >> > > > > Well, your idea was that I ruined your life because I was working in a sawmill. > > Robert, to be honest, you are incapable of ruining anyone's life but > your own. On that front, you seem to have been spectacularly successful. > > > But if you think credit card companies are your friends, then, by all means, I would > > say that you should choose your own friends. > > But I would point out your hypocrisy. You tell me that I have no choice but to be > > a salesman. Even my welding business was not good enough. But then I try to sell > > you something, and you only have ridicule for my efforts. > > > Why do you think my life is ruined? I used the Galilean transformation equations?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 16:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob6mg9$1sr8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #414100 |
On 3/25/2017 3:39 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 3/24/2017 8:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: >>> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 2:19:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 3/24/2017 3:25 PM, Robert Winn wrote: >>>>>> There are wise choices, Robert, and there are passive-a... >>>>> Oh sure, blame me. Well, when that credit card ruins your life, just don't say I did not warn you. >>>> >>>> Well, Robert, just to be absolutely transparent on this, if you are >>>> unhappy with your situation at the age of 69, then yes, the blame rests >>>> with you. You are in control of every decision you make, and you have >>>> been ever since you got out of the Navy. This includes whatever put you >>>> in jail in 1992, the frivolous lawsuit you put to federal court about >>>> candidacy laws in Arizona which got chucked on its ear, how you have >>>> been employed and how much, and how much time you spend on the internet. >>>> >>>> And if I get in trouble because of a $35 charge on my credit card, you >>>> can bet that I will assume all the blame for that. >>>> >>> >>> Well, your idea was that I ruined your life because I was working in a sawmill. >> >> Robert, to be honest, you are incapable of ruining anyone's life but >> your own. On that front, you seem to have been spectacularly successful. >> >>> But if you think credit card companies are your friends, then, by all means, I would >>> say that you should choose your own friends. >>> But I would point out your hypocrisy. You tell me that I have no choice but to be >>> a salesman. Even my welding business was not good enough. But then I try to sell >>> you something, and you only have ridicule for my efforts. >>> >> > Why do you think my life is ruined? I used the Galilean transformation equations? > Oh, heck no. You can use the Galilean transformation equations all you want. You can also use the bed of your pick-up as a potato garden. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 17:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <76abc9a3-fbe5-4a15-a595-bbb04d509d68@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #414102 |
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 2:12:45 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/25/2017 3:39 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 3/24/2017 8:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > >>> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 2:19:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 3/24/2017 3:25 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > >>>>>> There are wise choices, Robert, and there are passive-a... > >>>>> Oh sure, blame me. Well, when that credit card ruins your life, just don't say I did not warn you. > >>>> > >>>> Well, Robert, just to be absolutely transparent on this, if you are > >>>> unhappy with your situation at the age of 69, then yes, the blame rests > >>>> with you. You are in control of every decision you make, and you have > >>>> been ever since you got out of the Navy. This includes whatever put you > >>>> in jail in 1992, the frivolous lawsuit you put to federal court about > >>>> candidacy laws in Arizona which got chucked on its ear, how you have > >>>> been employed and how much, and how much time you spend on the internet. > >>>> > >>>> And if I get in trouble because of a $35 charge on my credit card, you > >>>> can bet that I will assume all the blame for that. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Well, your idea was that I ruined your life because I was working in a sawmill. > >> > >> Robert, to be honest, you are incapable of ruining anyone's life but > >> your own. On that front, you seem to have been spectacularly successful. > >> > >>> But if you think credit card companies are your friends, then, by all means, I would > >>> say that you should choose your own friends. > >>> But I would point out your hypocrisy. You tell me that I have no choice but to be > >>> a salesman. Even my welding business was not good enough. But then I try to sell > >>> you something, and you only have ridicule for my efforts. > >>> > >> > > Why do you think my life is ruined? I used the Galilean transformation equations? > > > > Oh, heck no. You can use the Galilean transformation equations all you > want. You can also use the bed of your pick-up as a potato garden. You seem to know about as much about farming as you do about relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-26 04:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ob77e6$m0m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #414122 |
Robert Winn whines: >> Oh, heck no. You can use the Galilean transformation equations all you >> want. You can also use the bed of your pick-up as a potato garden. > > You seem to know about as much about farming as you do about relativity. Hmm. Mr Winn. You are very length contracted today.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 19:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4c2f5a32-bd41-4f2d-9d82-aafdb7262c86@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #414131 |
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 7:01:46 PM UTC-7, Python wrote: > Robert Winn whines: > >> Oh, heck no. You can use the Galilean transformation equations all you > >> want. You can also use the bed of your pick-up as a potato garden. > > > > You seem to know about as much about farming as you do about relativity. > > Hmm. Mr Winn. You are very length contracted today. So, Python, when are we going to talk about coordinates again?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 15:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob3uto$12bu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413999 |
On 3/24/2017 2:16 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > Now, if you do not like the ways trees were being cut, loggers were the wrong people to accuse. > They purchased trees from the Forest Service by bidding on timber sales. With every timber sale > there was a contract agreed to by the purchaser detailing which trees were to be cut and how it > was to be done. Nobody liked the way they were being told to cut trees. It was entirely idiotic, > and everyone knew why. Forest Service personnel had discovered that it was easier to sit in an > office an mark a clearcut on a map than to go out into the woods and mark trees for selective cutting. I believe you when you say that everyone in Lincoln County Montana knew that the Forest Service policies about clearcutting was idiotic. After all, any idiot would be able to tell that sooner or later, Forest Service personnel would be told (via courts if necessary) to shut that nonsense down, because they'd gone too far and now there would be no logging at all and everyone would be out of a job. I would think that the people who lived there and did that work their whole lives would have said to the Forest Service, "It's not a good idea to clearcut trees and we've decided as a group we're not going to bid on that timber sale. Because in the end, that isn't sustainable, and sooner or later we know we'd all be out of work following such an idiotic path." I bet every single responsible and thinking person in the county, including you, spoke up on the matter and declined to partake in such foolishness, because you wanted to live their your whole life working in the sawmill. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 13:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <084fa3d7-49dc-4eb2-b2e4-0b4ae22371ea@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #414006 |
On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 1:18:04 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/24/2017 2:16 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > Now, if you do not like the ways trees were being cut, loggers were the wrong people to accuse. > > They purchased trees from the Forest Service by bidding on timber sales. With every timber sale > > there was a contract agreed to by the purchaser detailing which trees were to be cut and how it > > was to be done. Nobody liked the way they were being told to cut trees. It was entirely idiotic, > > and everyone knew why. Forest Service personnel had discovered that it was easier to sit in an > > office an mark a clearcut on a map than to go out into the woods and mark trees for selective cutting. > > I believe you when you say that everyone in Lincoln County Montana knew > that the Forest Service policies about clearcutting was idiotic. After > all, any idiot would be able to tell that sooner or later, Forest > Service personnel would be told (via courts if necessary) to shut that > nonsense down, because they'd gone too far and now there would be no > logging at all and everyone would be out of a job. I would think that > the people who lived there and did that work their whole lives would > have said to the Forest Service, "It's not a good idea to clearcut trees > and we've decided as a group we're not going to bid on that timber sale. > Because in the end, that isn't sustainable, and sooner or later we know > we'd all be out of work following such an idiotic path." I bet every > single responsible and thinking person in the county, including you, > spoke up on the matter and declined to partake in such foolishness, > because you wanted to live their your whole life working in the sawmill. > No, at that particular time they were too busy trying to keep the Forest Service from shutting down small sawmills. The Forest Service was starting to only put up large timber sales that only St. Regis and Louisiana Pacific had the resources to bid on. That was the controversy when I was in high school. Then I went in the Navy a year after high school, was gone to Vietnam for four years, and when I got back, there were no more small sawmills left. Even the one I worked in later was shut down at that time. It was obvious to me that there was a federal plan to shut down the lumber industry, and they were taking the easy ones first, and then they would shut down the big ones, which was exactly what happened. The court injunctions had nothing to do with improper logging methods. They were to save the spotted owl.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob12ks$1kh4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413869 |
On 3/23/2017 12:12 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > The local residents are restricted to use of a tiny amount of land that was homesteaded > or deeded to the railroad, and forced to live on whatever they receive in benefits from > the federal government. Robert, I once had an apprentice who had just gotten out of prison. Getting out of prison is starting life all over from ground zero. He was released with $50 and some clothes. He had no job skills, no references, no place to live other than a borrowed room, no car, no family to help support him. He showed up early every day, coming by town bus that dropped him off about 2 miles from my shop, and he worked harder and with more care than anyone I had ever met. Today, he is married, has a nice little home of his own, a recent car, and is doing very well with his own shop where he partners with someone who apprenticed with him. Because of that prison contact, I also met another man who was looking to get his feet on the ground after prison. But this man complained about taking public transportation to work, and he declined all sorts of work because he "didn't want to do that" and "liked what he did before," which was no longer available to him because of his felony conviction. He did not want to live in a borrowed room and said that if he could not have his own apartment he would just as soon live on the street. He ended up taking odd jobs now and then, but never got on his feet, and he has spent the last five years alternating between government handouts and getting in trouble. There is very little to respect about this man. I know that you were happy with your sawmill job in a place you called home. I know that you do not like big changes. I know that when big changes happen, you like to find someone to blame for those changes, because you would have preferred to be left alone to live where you were living, doing what you were doing. I know you think lowly of anyone whom you think might have been a player in the big change that happened. You remind me very much of the second man coming out of prison. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob15sa$1rj4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413858 |
On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: >> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide >> into the >> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You >> seem >> like a scientist, all right. > > You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute > significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that > forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A > little bit. > > Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It > is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and > one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you > determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one > variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another > variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do > not typically decide which variable is important before doing these > kinds of checks. > I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been causing global warming. I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to believe. Like equations. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 12:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8a3e617f-8f72-4704-b64f-d7e8f876c4db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413888 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 11:58:22 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: > > >> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide > >> into the > >> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You > >> seem > >> like a scientist, all right. > > > > You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute > > significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that > > forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A > > little bit. > > > > Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It > > is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and > > one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you > > determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one > > variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another > > variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do > > not typically decide which variable is important before doing these > > kinds of checks. > > > > I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. > > A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on > global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means > that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is > about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. > There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that > cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the > US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared > for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's > ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. > > Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk > coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons > of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds > of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year > for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt > 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have > contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. > > So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number > that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US > contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. > > Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US > carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, > indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that > forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been > causing global warming. > > I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that > make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to > believe. Like equations. > > No wonder you wanted the Bundys in prison. They were going to kill us all. Well, let me ask you another question. Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. Did you know that scientists admitted that the number of spotted owls continued to decrease after the lumber industry was shut down? Then scientists determined it was because this other kind of owl was moving into spotted owl habitat from eastern states, so Fish and Game people started killing this other kind of owl to save the spotted owl. Controlling nature can certainly be complicated. Maybe if you applied the Lorentz equations to the statistics.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 14:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob17re$1v9c$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413893 |
On 3/23/2017 2:18 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 11:58:22 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: >> >>>> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide >>>> into the >>>> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You >>>> seem >>>> like a scientist, all right. >>> >>> You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute >>> significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that >>> forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A >>> little bit. >>> >>> Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It >>> is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and >>> one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you >>> determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one >>> variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another >>> variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do >>> not typically decide which variable is important before doing these >>> kinds of checks. >>> >> >> I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. >> >> A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on >> global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means >> that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is >> about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. >> There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that >> cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the >> US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared >> for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's >> ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. >> >> Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk >> coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons >> of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds >> of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year >> for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt >> 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have >> contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. >> >> So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number >> that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US >> contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. >> >> Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US >> carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, >> indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that >> forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been >> causing global warming. >> >> I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that >> make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to >> believe. Like equations. >> >> > No wonder you wanted the Bundys in prison. They were going to kill us all. Good thing we have federally protected lands that the Bundys cannot scrape. > Well, let me ask you another question. I don't know why you'd ask a question about facts when you obviously don't refer to facts when you form a belief. > Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper > mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack > instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? > Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. It's not my idea about methane, Robert. It's what's called a fact. And if you think facts are to be suspected, Robert, then science really isn't a subject of interest for you. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8d809d3a-e8ce-4aa3-8973-4e99963dad9e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413896 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:32:01 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 2:18 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 11:58:22 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: > >> > >>>> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide > >>>> into the > >>>> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You > >>>> seem > >>>> like a scientist, all right. > >>> > >>> You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute > >>> significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that > >>> forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A > >>> little bit. > >>> > >>> Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It > >>> is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and > >>> one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you > >>> determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one > >>> variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another > >>> variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do > >>> not typically decide which variable is important before doing these > >>> kinds of checks. > >>> > >> > >> I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. > >> > >> A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on > >> global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means > >> that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is > >> about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. > >> There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that > >> cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the > >> US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared > >> for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's > >> ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. > >> > >> Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk > >> coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons > >> of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds > >> of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year > >> for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt > >> 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have > >> contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. > >> > >> So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number > >> that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US > >> contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. > >> > >> Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US > >> carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, > >> indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that > >> forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been > >> causing global warming. > >> > >> I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that > >> make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to > >> believe. Like equations. > >> > >> > > No wonder you wanted the Bundys in prison. They were going to kill us all. > > Good thing we have federally protected lands that the Bundys cannot scrape. > > > Well, let me ask you another question. > > I don't know why you'd ask a question about facts when you obviously > don't refer to facts when you form a belief. > > > Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper > > mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack > > instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? > > Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. > > It's not my idea about methane, Robert. It's what's called a fact. And > if you think facts are to be suspected, Robert, then science really > isn't a subject of interest for you. Well, if you do not want to answer the question about the paper mills, then, of course, you do not have to. So I think we should go right to the heart of the matter, which is population control. The reason why you wanted control of federal land was to control the population, right? The population of Lincoln County, Montana, has to be kept at 19,000, right? With regard to methane and your theories about it, what I keep track of are trends. Now to start off, the ozone layer was disappearing in Antarctica. You do not hear much about the ozone layer any more because there are so much more serious problems in Antarctica. Aliens are establishing bases there, there are pyramids and ice caves, which is rather puzzling because the flat earth society says that Antarctica does not even exist. But with regard to all of these questions, something would be true, I think you will agree. With this degree of controversy about the continent of Antarctica, I just kind of form an opinion that almost everything said about Antarctica is untrue, including the original story about the ozone layer. I do believe Betty White when she says seven million acres of trees are burning every year. Oh, to correct one of your earlier statements, the worst year for forest fires was 2015. 10.1 million acres burned that year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 15:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob1adn$4uq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413901 |
On 3/23/2017 3:02 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:32:01 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 3/23/2017 2:18 PM, Robert Winn wrote: >>> On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 11:58:22 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: >>>> >>>>>> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide >>>>>> into the >>>>>> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You >>>>>> seem >>>>>> like a scientist, all right. >>>>> >>>>> You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute >>>>> significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that >>>>> forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A >>>>> little bit. >>>>> >>>>> Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It >>>>> is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and >>>>> one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you >>>>> determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one >>>>> variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another >>>>> variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do >>>>> not typically decide which variable is important before doing these >>>>> kinds of checks. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. >>>> >>>> A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on >>>> global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means >>>> that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is >>>> about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. >>>> There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that >>>> cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the >>>> US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared >>>> for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's >>>> ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. >>>> >>>> Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk >>>> coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons >>>> of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds >>>> of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year >>>> for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt >>>> 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have >>>> contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. >>>> >>>> So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number >>>> that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US >>>> contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. >>>> >>>> Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US >>>> carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, >>>> indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that >>>> forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been >>>> causing global warming. >>>> >>>> I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that >>>> make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to >>>> believe. Like equations. >>>> >>>> >>> No wonder you wanted the Bundys in prison. They were going to kill us all. >> >> Good thing we have federally protected lands that the Bundys cannot scrape. >> >>> Well, let me ask you another question. >> >> I don't know why you'd ask a question about facts when you obviously >> don't refer to facts when you form a belief. >> >>> Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper >>> mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack >>> instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? >>> Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. >> >> It's not my idea about methane, Robert. It's what's called a fact. And >> if you think facts are to be suspected, Robert, then science really >> isn't a subject of interest for you. > > Well, if you do not want to answer the question about the paper mills, then, of > course, you do not have to. So I think we should go right to the heart of the > matter, which is population control. The reason why you wanted control of federal > land was to control the population, right? Heck no. But feel free to tell me that you have read my mind to determine that my statement is lie, as well as telling me there are no Home Depot stores in Arizona except for the one they were thinking about building in 2008. Or tell me that as far as you're concerned, I'm an Eastern-establishment Democrat party member pro-slavery resident of Delaware who is trying to control the population of Lincoln County, Montana, by spreading asbestos everywhere and burning all the trees down. This would be in keeping with what you call being able to think. For more examples, see below. > The population of Lincoln County, Montana, has to be kept at 19,000, right? > With regard to methane and your theories about it, what I keep track of are trends. > Now to start off, the ozone layer was disappearing in Antarctica. You do not > hear much about the ozone layer any more because there are so much more serious > problems in Antarctica. Aliens are establishing bases there, there are pyramids > and ice caves, which is rather puzzling because the flat earth society says that > Antarctica does not even exist. > But with regard to all of these questions, something would be true, I think you > will agree. With this degree of controversy about the continent of Antarctica, > I just kind of form an opinion that almost everything said about Antarctica is > untrue, including the original story about the ozone layer. I do believe Betty > White when she says seven million acres of trees are burning every year. Oh, > to correct one of your earlier statements, the worst year for forest fires was 2015. > 10.1 million acres burned that year. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dacb7a79-70db-49eb-aa5d-fcb05076e7b2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413901 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 1:02:26 PM UTC-7, Robert Winn wrote: > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:32:01 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > On 3/23/2017 2:18 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 11:58:22 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > >> On 3/23/2017 9:55 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > >>> On 3/23/2017 5:15 AM, Robert Winn wrote: > > >> > > >>>> So you think a 500,000 acre forest fire does not put carbon dioxide > > >>>> into the > > >>>> air, but if someone has a few cattle, that causes global warming. You > > >>>> seem > > >>>> like a scientist, all right. > > >>> > > >>> You speak in absolutes. If I say that forest fires do not contribute > > >>> significantly to the recent warming effect, you take that to mean that > > >>> forest fires do not contribute at all. Of course they contribute. A > > >>> little bit. > > >>> > > >>> Science is a quantitative discipline, Robert. Numbers are important. It > > >>> is entirely possible for there to be two contributors to an effect, and > > >>> one of them is a lot bigger than the other. In science, the way you > > >>> determine that is by experiments with controls, where you change one > > >>> variable and see how big the effect is, and then you change another > > >>> variable and you see how big the effect is. In science, anyway, you do > > >>> not typically decide which variable is important before doing these > > >>> kinds of checks. > > >>> > > >> > > >> I'll show you what I mean by quantitative, Robert. > > >> > > >> A cow releases about 100 kg of methane a year. Methane has an effect on > > >> global warming that is 23 times worse than carbon dioxide. This means > > >> that a cow produces the equivalent of 2300 kg of CO2 every year. This is > > >> about the same as is produced by driving a car 8000 miles every year. > > >> There are right now about 98 million cattle in the US. This means that > > >> cows produce over 200 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in just the > > >> US. This number needs to be augmented by the forest land that is cleared > > >> for cattle grazing, because removing trees also removes the ecosystem's > > >> ability to extract CO2 from the atmosphere. > > >> > > >> Now, let's compare that to forest fires. Every acre of large-trunk > > >> coniferous forest that burns in a forest fire produces 4.81 metric tons > > >> of carbon (CO2, CO, and CH4), and this is the worst case as other kinds > > >> of forests burning do not produce nearly as much carbon. The worst year > > >> for forest fires was in 2006 when there were 96,385 fires that burnt > > >> 9.87 million acres of forest. Thus, at the top end, forest fires have > > >> contributed something less than 47 million metric tons of CO2. > > >> > > >> So, where I grew up (a western state like you), 47 million is a number > > >> that is a lot smaller than 200 million. So yes, forest fires in the US > > >> contributes less to global warming than do cows in the US. > > >> > > >> Of course, both of these numbers are small in comparison to the total US > > >> carbon dioxide emissions of 6.05 billion metric tons per year. So yes, > > >> indeed, 47 million is a small fraction of 6050 million. Meaning that > > >> forest fires are in fact a very small contributor to what has been > > >> causing global warming. > > >> > > >> I know, of course, that facts with numbers are the kinds of things that > > >> make you gag, Robert. They just get in the way of what you want to > > >> believe. Like equations. > > >> > > >> > > > No wonder you wanted the Bundys in prison. They were going to kill us all. > > > > Good thing we have federally protected lands that the Bundys cannot scrape. > > > > > Well, let me ask you another question. > > > > I don't know why you'd ask a question about facts when you obviously > > don't refer to facts when you form a belief. > > > > > Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper > > > mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack > > > instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? > > > Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. > > > > It's not my idea about methane, Robert. It's what's called a fact. And > > if you think facts are to be suspected, Robert, then science really > > isn't a subject of interest for you. > > Well, if you do not want to answer the question about the paper mills, then, of course, you do not have to. So I think we should go right to the heart of the matter, which is population control. The reason why you wanted control of federal land was to control the population, right? The population of Lincoln County, Montana, has to be kept at 19,000, right? > With regard to methane and your theories about it, what I keep track of are trends. Now to start off, the ozone layer was disappearing in Antarctica. You do not hear much about the ozone layer any more because there are so much more serious problems in Antarctica. Aliens are establishing bases there, there are pyramids and ice caves, which is rather puzzling because the flat earth society says that Antarctica does not even exist. > But with regard to all of these questions, something would be true, I think you will agree. With this degree of controversy about the continent of Antarctica, I just kind of form an opinion that almost everything said about Antarctica is untrue, including the original story about the ozone layer. I do believe Betty White when she says seven million acres of trees are burning every year. Oh, to correct one of your earlier statements, the worst year for forest fires was 2015. 10.1 million acres burned that year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4b2f4857-fecd-4e53-80ca-106e290c2660@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413896 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 12:32:01 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 2:18 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > > > Good thing we have federally protected lands that the Bundys cannot scrape. > I always liked the Bundys. Hard working people who were contributing to society. They had a really good cattle operation until the federal government decided to put them out of business. > > Well, let me ask you another question. > > I don't know why you'd ask a question about facts when you obviously > don't refer to facts when you form a belief. > > > Environmentalists wanted to shut down paper mills. So why do these paper > > mills emit so much more carbon dioxide when it goes up their smokestack > > instead of right into the air like happens with a forest fire? > > Your idea about methane sounds like it might be a spotted owl story to me. > > It's not my idea about methane, Robert. It's what's called a fact. And > if you think facts are to be suspected, Robert, then science really > isn't a subject of interest for you. > Well, this seems to be another thing you do not want to discuss. It seems to me that if you were telling the truth about methane, then you could show the scientific proof of what you say. Instead you just make a statement, and everyone is supposed to believe it because scientists were involved. Where have we seen that before? Oh, that's right. The length contraction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 15:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob1bg0$7d7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413907 |
On 3/23/2017 3:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > Well, this seems to be another thing you do not want to discuss. It seems to me that if > you were telling the truth about methane, then you could show the scientific proof of what > you say. Nah, that would catering to your laziness. Instead, I will just cite facts that anyone (including you) is able to look up. This is the difference between you and me. You are prone to making statements without proof AND are counter to facts that anyone can look up, such as the complete absence of Home Depot stores in Arizona. So you can rest assured that if you ever decided to check facts yourself, then those would bear out the facts that I cite for you. In the meantime, though, your strategy is to goad people into trying to convince you with whatever you call "scientific proof" so that you can turn around and say that you don't believe any of that if it was measured by a scientist. In fact, you've never described anything that you would find compelling enough to convince you that you were wrong about something. As far as I know, you still believe there are no Home Depot stores in Arizona, because the store listings are just statistics and you've never taken much stock in statistics. > Instead you just make a statement, and everyone is supposed to believe it because scientists > were involved. Where have we seen that before? > Oh, that's right. The length contraction. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 16:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a2a8d3d0-2253-4e37-a8e1-b4ea4b6fb79a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413911 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 1:34:12 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 3:17 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > > Well, this seems to be another thing you do not want to discuss. It seems to me that if > > you were telling the truth about methane, then you could show the scientific proof of what > > you say. > > Nah, that would catering to your laziness. Instead, I will just cite > facts that anyone (including you) is able to look up. This is the > difference between you and me. You are prone to making statements > without proof AND are counter to facts that anyone can look up, such as > the complete absence of Home Depot stores in Arizona. > > So you can rest assured that if you ever decided to check facts > yourself, then those would bear out the facts that I cite for you. In > the meantime, though, your strategy is to goad people into trying to > convince you with whatever you call "scientific proof" so that you can > turn around and say that you don't believe any of that if it was > measured by a scientist. > > In fact, you've never described anything that you would find compelling > enough to convince you that you were wrong about something. As far as I > know, you still believe there are no Home Depot stores in Arizona, > because the store listings are just statistics and you've never taken > much stock in statistics. > > > Instead you just make a statement, and everyone is supposed to believe it because scientists > > were involved. Where have we seen that before? > > Oh, that's right. The length contraction. Well, as you know, I appear to have said Arizona instead of Maricopa, Arizona. When I see someone make a mistake like that, I usually say, I think you meant Maricopa, Arizona. But you rant and rave for about ten posts about me saying there are no Home Depot stores in Arizona, which only goes to show that it is a waste of time trying to talk to you. As I said many times before, there is no communication taking place between us. It is not for lack of trying on my part. I have to wonder why you are still posting to me. You already have all the trees. The Bundy family are all in jail. The population of Lincoln County, Montana will probably never reach 20,000. You do not want to discuss relativity. So I have to conclude that you just want to gloat about how successful you were in reaching your goals in life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 07:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob332f$16gi$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413932 |
On 3/23/2017 6:26 PM, Robert Winn wrote: > Well, as you know, I appear to have said Arizona instead of Maricopa, Arizona. When I > see someone make a mistake like that, I usually say, I think you meant Maricopa, Arizona. > But you rant and rave for about ten posts about me saying there are no Home Depot stores > in Arizona, which only goes to show that it is a waste of time trying to talk to you. I see you can't overcome the habit of blaming someone else when confronted with your own mistakes. > As I said many times before, there is no communication taking place between us. It is > not for lack of trying on my part. > I have to wonder why you are still posting to me. I like watching you flop around. > You already have all the trees. The Bundy family are all in jail. The population of > Lincoln County, Montana will probably never reach 20,000. You do not want to discuss > relativity. So I have to conclude that you just want to gloat about how successful > you were in reaching your goals in life. I don't believe I've discussed my goals once. I believe I've mentioned some of your character defects, which you've amply demonstrated, and I believe we've discussed some of your interesting personal decisions which have put you in a position where you appear to be suffering from a great amount of frustration. But you can conclude whatever you like, as you usually do, whether or not it is based in any facts. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 16 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web