Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #410875 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-02-25 13:37 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-03-23 07:38 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 427 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-25 13:37 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tiffaney Mantooth <efofn@ionyine.info> - 2017-02-25 21:44 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-25 16:50 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Majorie Easterwood <wosdfs@ewrheihe.org> - 2017-02-25 23:11 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-26 13:16 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-26 22:24 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 06:08 -0800
Incoming Speed of Light Majorie Easterwood <wosdfs@ewrheihe.org> - 2017-02-27 14:30 +0000
Re: Incoming Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 07:22 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-28 21:29 -0600
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 07:20 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 07:35 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 08:52 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 09:47 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 10:20 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:17 -0600
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-02 10:01 -0600
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:18 -0600
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Wesley Jorstad <aytd@asdsqoorJ.info> - 2017-03-01 19:05 +0000
Re: Incoming Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-01 13:14 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 13:41 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-02 06:56 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-02 02:21 +0000
Re: Incoming Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-02 06:59 -0800
Re: Incoming Speed of Light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-03-02 19:38 +0000
Re: Incoming Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-02 12:44 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 08:34 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 07:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 09:31 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 09:26 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 11:38 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 10:57 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 13:08 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-28 00:49 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 10:24 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 07:23 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-28 09:33 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 11:52 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-01 03:44 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 05:36 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 05:51 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 08:20 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-02 02:46 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-02 05:15 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-02 06:58 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-02 11:48 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-03 01:20 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-03 05:54 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-03 13:08 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-03 13:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-03 18:38 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-05 14:55 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 02:32 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 01:00 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 02:25 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 05:40 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 06:28 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 07:02 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 08:00 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 08:04 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 12:55 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 14:21 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 16:22 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 18:05 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 18:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-06 02:15 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 05:43 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-07 03:11 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 13:11 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 08:37 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-08 04:32 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-08 05:34 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-10 06:26 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-10 07:49 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-12 20:20 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 03:26 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 04:03 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-13 06:10 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 06:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-13 06:23 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 07:25 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-13 09:02 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 09:24 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-13 12:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:27 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-14 12:06 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 19:56 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 03:20 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 03:24 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 07:22 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-18 13:37 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-18 23:45 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-20 10:05 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Idimi Higame <iumia@igmwwad.hh> - 2017-03-20 16:50 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 09:05 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Oretha Moorhead <traaho@maaodrd.oe> - 2017-03-21 18:07 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-22 07:11 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 09:03 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-13 22:28 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-14 05:51 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 05:39 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-14 20:44 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-14 05:45 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 06:11 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-14 07:06 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-14 12:04 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 14:49 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 06:44 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-16 06:24 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 06:31 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-14 21:04 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-14 14:49 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 06:16 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-15 06:56 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 17:54 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-15 15:46 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-16 06:28 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-16 04:36 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-16 21:17 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-14 14:51 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 06:37 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 03:42 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 11:11 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 11:56 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 05:38 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 17:37 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 10:45 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 21:28 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 08:19 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 18:16 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-15 12:25 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-15 21:35 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 03:07 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-16 20:40 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 13:46 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-17 09:58 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 03:21 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-17 12:42 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 06:05 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-17 06:06 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 03:09 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-15 23:03 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-16 10:13 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-16 21:24 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-16 16:03 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-17 10:04 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-18 13:24 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-18 23:25 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 19:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 20:29 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-19 05:41 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 23:19 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-19 09:33 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 23:28 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-18 23:44 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-19 09:36 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-19 04:37 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-19 06:42 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 08:12 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-20 12:34 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 13:47 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-21 12:04 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:12 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-21 12:21 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-22 07:27 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:28 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 03:00 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 06:36 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 20:08 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 15:27 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 13:55 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 14:28 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-23 15:36 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-24 00:09 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-24 04:51 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-24 05:55 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-24 09:10 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-24 08:34 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-24 11:51 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 14:04 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-25 23:48 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-24 08:04 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 07:09 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-25 09:08 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 14:04 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-21 12:16 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-22 03:59 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 04:32 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-22 04:45 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 05:09 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-23 05:49 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 03:42 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-19 16:24 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 09:05 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-20 12:23 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-20 13:23 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-21 11:56 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 12:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-21 12:35 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 14:45 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-22 03:26 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:50 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-23 06:02 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 08:24 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-23 09:37 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-22 07:16 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 06:30 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 20:25 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 02:41 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 09:50 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 05:24 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-21 05:33 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 13:19 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-21 08:16 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-22 07:08 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:11 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 02:28 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:14 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 02:33 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 03:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 02:39 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-20 11:23 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 09:59 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-21 15:05 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-22 07:38 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-22 13:04 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-22 11:58 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-23 03:27 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-23 06:34 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 09:19 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-23 07:52 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-24 05:53 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 19:34 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-25 09:14 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-25 03:54 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-25 04:37 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jack Cleveland <ecle@waewa.ce> - 2017-03-25 12:49 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-25 23:18 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-25 16:23 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-26 09:54 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-25 05:50 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-25 10:35 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-25 12:36 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-26 14:19 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-27 06:33 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-03-27 06:49 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-27 07:07 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-27 08:03 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-03-30 01:38 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-25 23:22 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-20 10:29 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-21 09:32 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-26 14:24 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-27 06:02 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Michiko Husband <nuknuuu@wmnkiin.hi> - 2017-03-28 14:12 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-28 22:22 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-17 09:40 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 03:09 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 20:41 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 17:35 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-28 10:27 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-28 12:01 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-03 00:37 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 07:54 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-03 12:39 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 14:48 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-03 13:21 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 15:53 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-04 01:01 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 07:59 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-04 06:29 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-04 06:34 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 00:50 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 15:22 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 15:32 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 17:41 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-05 17:09 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 12:19 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-07 04:10 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 08:31 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-07 15:22 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 17:33 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 15:44 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-10 06:38 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 09:19 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 22:35 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-12 20:25 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 03:36 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-13 04:00 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-13 06:17 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 06:19 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-13 06:25 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 07:27 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-03 14:59 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-03 17:41 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 18:05 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-04 09:02 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-04 15:50 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 15:24 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-06 06:16 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-28 06:16 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 08:29 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-28 15:46 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-01 13:42 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-28 13:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-28 13:59 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 16:08 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-28 23:32 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 16:45 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-01 14:01 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-02 10:19 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-02 13:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-03-02 23:12 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-04 08:57 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-04 08:21 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-04 09:13 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-04 09:19 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-04 17:04 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-05 09:07 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-05 11:58 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-05 10:23 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-05 10:31 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-05 10:39 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 15:17 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-03-05 22:55 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 15:14 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-07 08:15 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-07 09:22 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-07 10:28 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-07 13:14 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 13:44 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-07 14:18 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 14:43 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-03-14 06:13 +1100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 12:25 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-03-14 07:10 +1100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 13:27 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-03-14 12:18 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 15:57 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-03-07 14:05 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-07 17:13 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-08 07:19 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-08 10:36 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-09 11:09 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-07 10:35 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-08 06:27 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-04 17:24 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-06 10:39 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-06 09:16 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 12:11 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-06 10:41 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-05 05:28 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-05 13:40 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-05 13:47 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-05 06:26 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-10 11:11 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-03-13 10:56 -0500
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-27 16:26 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Majorie Easterwood <wosdfs@ewrheihe.org> - 2017-02-27 16:37 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-28 17:45 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Reuben Ettinger <ineitb@tbgrtiadd.org> - 2017-02-28 18:13 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-28 19:51 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 08:57 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-27 18:18 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-27 09:33 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-28 04:11 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-28 06:22 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 08:27 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-28 13:17 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-28 15:37 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-01 06:22 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:18 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-02 06:28 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 17:35 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-03 06:44 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 08:51 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-03 07:49 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 10:05 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 10:26 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-03 10:32 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-03 10:36 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-03 10:57 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-03 15:29 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 17:12 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-03-04 07:56 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-05 05:19 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Jeannette Winebarger <taJaot@eeoJnee.org> - 2017-03-05 14:53 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-03-05 15:26 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-28 15:54 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-27 06:59 +0000
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-03-02 09:11 +1100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-26 00:10 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-26 08:33 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-26 09:07 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-26 09:41 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-26 19:52 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-26 11:53 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-26 12:09 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-26 23:09 +0100
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-26 15:41 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-26 15:37 -0600
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-26 17:08 -0800
The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 10:33 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 12:50 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:20 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-03-01 13:32 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:34 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-01 13:41 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-02 11:45 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-02 12:16 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-02 17:49 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-03 13:07 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-03 17:51 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-03 19:19 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 13:28 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 15:52 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 18:09 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-08 15:24 -0800
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-14 12:34 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-15 16:31 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 11:50 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-18 17:03 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-19 12:05 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 10:28 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-20 12:35 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-21 13:37 -0700
Re: The Incoming Speed of Light from A Moving Source Is Variable Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-03-23 07:38 -0700
Page 9 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 22 Next page →
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-20 13:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5d5d784d-d954-45f3-83cc-e3cf84b2ec36@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413472 |
On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 2:34:36 PM UTC-5, matt.r...@outlook.com wrote: > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog > >The Gaia DR1 results are published, and no weird positional anomalies dependent > >on radial velocity exist. > > >That is sufficient evident to take down your entire fantasy house of cards. > > Your mindless quoting of irrelevent facts copied at random from various websites > does not constitute as substantiation. > Until you supply a particular source, its accredited redshift, and three and a half > years of orbital path measurements on the satelitte image plane...your arguments > are hot air and bluster only. Speak for yourself. Do you have 3 1/2 years of measurements to show me?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | matt.rush200@outlook.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-21 12:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dcd766f5-97b9-459a-ba9d-83c862c992cf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413481 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog >> >The Gaia DR1 results are published, and no weird positional anomalies dependent >> >on radial velocity exist. > >> >That is sufficient evident to take down your entire fantasy house of cards. > >> Your mindless quoting of irrelevent facts copied at random from various websites >> does not constitute as substantiation. >> Until you supply a particular source, its accredited redshift, and three and a half >> years of orbital path measurements on the satelitte image plane...your arguments >> are hot air and bluster only. >Speak for yourself. >Do you have 3 1/2 years of measurements to show me? Looks like you'll have to do some research for a change and find them yourself, instead of just blowing more hot air. Seeing as it's you who made the unsubstantiated claim that these measurements show no c+v, not me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-21 12:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <934c87ed-bbd5-45d2-856f-85c21f3bb325@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413572 |
On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 2:04:20 PM UTC-5, matt.r...@outlook.com wrote: > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog > > >Speak for yourself. > >Do you have 3 1/2 years of measurements to show me? > > Looks like you'll have to do some research for a change and find > them yourself, instead of just blowing more hot air. Seeing as it's you > who made the unsubstantiated claim that these measurements show no > c+v, not me. The fact that over a billion celestial objects have been localized to fractional milliarcsecond resolution demonstrates the validity of constant c. c+v would have screwed up the entire analysis.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | matt.rush200@outlook.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-21 12:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6ff59023-2044-4e39-bae6-e462490b8633@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413574 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog >c+v would have screwed up the analysis. Says the person who is unable to back up his claims with evidence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-22 07:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnod49qn.l8i.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413574 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > matt wrote: >> >> Looks like you'll have to do some research for a change and find >> them yourself, instead of just blowing more hot air. Seeing as it's you >> who made the unsubstantiated claim that these measurements show no >> c+v, not me. > > The fact that over a billion celestial objects have been localized > to fractional milliarcsecond resolution demonstrates the validity > of constant c. The "fact"? A billion at an average of one per second would take more than 31 years and 8 months. You wanna tell us how Gaia managed to focus on so many objects so quickly and accurately and precisely for each and every one?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-22 03:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e899d6ce-f2b0-4ecd-a7da-3b26b02c8a1f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413659 |
On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 2:27:24 AM UTC-5, Ned Latham wrote: > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > The fact that over a billion celestial objects have been localized > > to fractional milliarcsecond resolution demonstrates the validity > > of constant c. > > The "fact"? A billion at an average of one per second would take more > than 31 years and 8 months. You wanna tell us how Gaia managed to > focus on so many objects so quickly and accurately and precisely > for each and every one? There is a lot published on the web on the technologies employed in Gaia and on the MASSIVE data analysis required to reduce the multiple terabytes of data. I have elsewhere on this group and on this thread referred to some of this literature. Rather than post those links again, I will merely post a popular "gee-whiz" link with a pretty video. Enjoy. http://m.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/Gaia_s_billion-star_map_hints_at_treasures_to_come
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 03:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnod6ehn.l5p.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413674 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > > > The fact that over a billion celestial objects have been localized > > > to fractional milliarcsecond resolution demonstrates the validity > > > of constant c. > > > > The "fact"? A billion at an average of one per second would take more > > than 31 years and 8 months. You wanna tell us how Gaia managed to > > focus on so many objects so quickly and accurately and precisely > > for each and every one? > > There is a lot published on the web on the technologies employed in > Gaia and on the MASSIVE data analysis required to reduce the multiple > terabytes of data. > > I have elsewhere on this group and on this thread referred to some of > this literature. Rather than post those links again, I will merely post > a popular "gee-whiz" link with a pretty video. Enjoy. > http://m.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/ > Gaia_s_billion-star_map_hints_at_treasures_to_come "This map shows the density of stars observed by Gaia in each portion of the sky. Brighter regions indicate denser concentrations of stars, while darker regions correspond to patches of the sky where fewer stars are observed. "The Milky Way is a spiral galaxy, with most of its stars residing in a disc about 100 000 light-years across and about 1000 light-years thick. This structure is visible in the sky as the Galactic Plane - the brightest portion of this image -which runs horizontally and is especially bright at the centre. "Darker regions across the Galactic Plane correspond to dense clouds of interstellar gas and dust that absorb starlight along the line of sight. "Many globular and open clusters - groupings of stars held together by their mutual gravity - are also sprinkled across the image. "Globular clusters, large assemblies of hundreds of thousands to millions of old stars, are mainly found in the halo of the Milky Way, a roughly spherical structure with a radius of about 100 000 light-years, and so are visible across the image. Open clusters are smaller assemblies of hundreds to thousands of stars and are found mainly in the Galactic Plane. "The two bright objects in the lower right of the image are the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds, two dwarf galaxies orbiting the Milky Way. Other nearby galaxies are also visible, most notably Andromeda (also known as M31), the largest galactic neighbour to the Milky Way, in the lower left of the image. Below Andromeda is its satellite, the Triangulum galaxy (M33). "A number of artefacts are also visible on the image. These curved features and darker stripes are not of astronomical origin but rather reflect Gaia's scanning procedure. As this map is based on observations performed during the mission's first year, the survey is not yet uniform across the sky. "These artefacts will gradually disappear as more data are gathered during the five-year mission." ---- You failed. Miserably. That is not even close to justifying your so-0called "fact". I repeat: you wanna tell us how Gaia managed to focus individually on over 1100 million objects in just 14 months with sufficient precision and over a sufficient period for accurate measurement of apparent speed?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 06:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c6b3d535-c9b4-4792-980d-6f8355ab9b85@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413821 |
On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 at 10:00:12 PM UTC-5, Ned Latham wrote: > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > The "fact"? A billion at an average of one per second would take more > > > than 31 years and 8 months. You wanna tell us how Gaia managed to > > > focus on so many objects so quickly and accurately and precisely > > > for each and every one? > > > > There is a lot published on the web on the technologies employed in > > Gaia and on the MASSIVE data analysis required to reduce the multiple > > terabytes of data. > > > > I have elsewhere on this group and on this thread referred to some of > > this literature. Rather than post those links again, I will merely post > > a popular "gee-whiz" link with a pretty video. Enjoy. > > http://m.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia/ > > Gaia_s_billion-star_map_hints_at_treasures_to_come > > "This map shows the density of stars observed by Gaia in each portion of > the sky. Brighter regions indicate denser concentrations of stars, while > darker regions correspond to patches of the sky where fewer stars are > observed. > > "The Milky Way is a spiral galaxy, with most of its stars residing in a > disc about 100 000 light-years across and about 1000 light-years thick. > This structure is visible in the sky as the Galactic Plane - the > brightest portion of this image -which runs horizontally and is > especially bright at the centre. > > "Darker regions across the Galactic Plane correspond to dense clouds of > interstellar gas and dust that absorb starlight along the line of sight. > > "Many globular and open clusters - groupings of stars held together by > their mutual gravity - are also sprinkled across the image. > > "Globular clusters, large assemblies of hundreds of thousands to millions > of old stars, are mainly found in the halo of the Milky Way, a roughly > spherical structure with a radius of about 100 000 light-years, and so > are visible across the image. > > Open clusters are smaller assemblies of hundreds to thousands of stars > and are found mainly in the Galactic Plane. > > "The two bright objects in the lower right of the image are the Large and > Small Magellanic Clouds, two dwarf galaxies orbiting the Milky Way. > Other nearby galaxies are also visible, most notably Andromeda (also > known as M31), the largest galactic neighbour to the Milky Way, in the > lower left of the image. Below Andromeda is its satellite, the > Triangulum galaxy (M33). > > "A number of artefacts are also visible on the image. These curved > features and darker stripes are not of astronomical origin but rather > reflect Gaia's scanning procedure. As this map is based on observations > performed during the mission's first year, the survey is not yet uniform > across the sky. > > "These artefacts will gradually disappear as more data are gathered > during the five-year mission." > > ---- > > You failed. Miserably. > > That is not even close to justifying your so-0called "fact". > I repeat: you wanna tell us how Gaia managed to focus individually > on over 1100 million objects in just 14 months with sufficient > precision and over a sufficient period for accurate measurement > of apparent speed? You are incredibly ignorant and too lazy to try to learn things on your own. I specifically told you that I was not going to take on the burden of trying to educate you, since you obviously are not receptive to the idea of correcting your misconceptions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 20:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnod8aqc.j44.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413846 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The fact that over a billion celestial objects have been localized > > > > > to fractional milliarcsecond resolution demonstrates the validity > > > > > of constant c. > > > > > > > > The "fact"? A billion at an average of one per second would take more > > > > than 31 years and 8 months. You wanna tell us how Gaia managed to > > > > focus on so many objects so quickly and accurately and precisely > > > > for each and every one? ----snip---- > > "A number of artefacts are also visible on the image. These curved > > features and darker stripes are not of astronomical origin but rather > > reflect Gaia's scanning procedure. As this map is based on observations > > performed during the mission's first year, the survey is not yet uniform > > across the sky. > > > > "These artefacts will gradually disappear as more data are gathered > > during the five-year mission." > > > > ---- > > > > You failed. Miserably. > > > > That is not even close to justifying your so-0called "fact". > > I repeat: you wanna tell us how Gaia managed to focus individually > > on over 1100 million objects in just 14 months with sufficient > > precision and over a sufficient period for accurate measurement > > of apparent speed? > > You are incredibly ignorant and too lazy to try to learn things > on your own. > > I specifically told you that I was not going to take on the burden > of trying to educate you, since you obviously are not receptive to > the idea of correcting your misconceptions. Oh, but I am. I have already corrected my misconception of you as being anything like an honest debater.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 15:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob1b3k$6i0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413905 |
On 3/23/2017 3:08 PM, Ned Latham wrote: > Oh, but I am. I have already corrected my misconception of you as > being anything like an honest debater. The problem you face, Ned, is that you believe that validation comes in the form of winning arguments. It's known as being a "right-fighter", and that attitude oozes out of every syllable you type. I imagine the only thing that is more frustrating to you than your loneliness is when people stop engaging with you in the confrontational debate manner you find so enjoyable. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 13:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7bc2069c-a805-45d1-8e26-d963e426507a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413910 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:27:36 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 3/23/2017 3:08 PM, Ned Latham wrote: > > Oh, but I am. I have already corrected my misconception of you as > > being anything like an honest debater. > > The problem you face, Ned, is that you believe that validation comes in > the form of winning arguments. It's known as being a "right-fighter", > and that attitude oozes out of every syllable you type. I imagine the > only thing that is more frustrating to you than your loneliness is when > people stop engaging with you in the confrontational debate manner you > find so enjoyable. In order to discuss physics, there have to be at least SOME points of agreement on physical law. It wasn't quite so bad when Ned asserted that cosmic redshift does not necessarily imply an expanding universe, because a fair number of reasonable people used to believe that, and discussions of that point would lead into demonstrations that "tired light" arguments don't work, etc. But when Ned begins denying ANY RELATIONSHIP AT ALL between Doppler effect and radial velocity, shrugging off my arguments about radar guns, spacecraft tracking, binary stars, galactic rotation and so forth as "irrelevant", at that point I just have to walk away.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 14:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7f9389da-e2c2-42a4-bc84-ecc9beade603@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413917 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:55:05 PM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:27:36 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > On 3/23/2017 3:08 PM, Ned Latham wrote: > > > Oh, but I am. I have already corrected my misconception of you as > > > being anything like an honest debater. > > > > The problem you face, Ned, is that you believe that validation comes in > > the form of winning arguments. It's known as being a "right-fighter", > > and that attitude oozes out of every syllable you type. I imagine the > > only thing that is more frustrating to you than your loneliness is when > > people stop engaging with you in the confrontational debate manner you > > find so enjoyable. > > In order to discuss physics, there have to be at least SOME points of agreement > on physical law. It wasn't quite so bad when Ned asserted that cosmic redshift > does not necessarily imply an expanding universe, because a fair number of > reasonable people used to believe that, and discussions of that point would lead > into demonstrations that "tired light" arguments don't work, etc. > > But when Ned begins denying ANY RELATIONSHIP AT ALL between Doppler effect and > radial velocity, shrugging off my arguments about radar guns, spacecraft > tracking, binary stars, galactic rotation and so forth as "irrelevant", at that > point I just have to walk away. A conservative educator, E. D. Hirsch, wrote a very influential book that decried trends in education that he considered counterproductive to the making of a strong citizenry. Multicultural curricula, Ebonics, multilingual education, etc. did not prepare children to succeed in adult life. The ability to communicate with others, a primary requirement for success, requires learning a common shared pool of knowledge. This common shared pool of knowledge was mostly "dead white male" stuff. The list of things that he believed that every American needs to know sparked a national debate. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/what-every-american-should-know/397334/ Although I do not agree with the entirety of Hirsch's thesis, he makes some valid points. Many of the points that he makes have direct applicability to the debate that I have had with Ned and Matt. Both Ned and Matt appear to be completely lacking in the basic shared pool of knowledge that facilitates communication in physics. There is no hope for me to convince either of them that they could be wrong, since neither of them are capable of understanding what I say. Every one of my sentences gets misconstrued. So I'm walking away.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-23 15:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1f9bbc93-3201-4c21-a739-4b3563479b52@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413923 |
On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:28:43 PM UTC-6, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > Although I do not agree with the entirety of Hirsch's thesis, he makes some > valid points. Many of the points that he makes have direct applicability to > the debate that I have had with Ned and Matt. Both Ned and Matt appear to be > completely lacking in the basic shared pool of knowledge that facilitates > communication in physics. There is no hope for me to convince either of them > that they could be wrong, since neither of them are capable of understanding > what I say. Every one of my sentences gets misconstrued. > > So I'm walking away. “The more you know, the dumber you sound to stupid people.” -- Anonymous “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.” -- L. Frank Baum “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride and vanity.” ― Dale Carnegie
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 00:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ce71dc2e-bf4c-4522-8265-67029f4828ce@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413931 |
W dniu czwartek, 23 marca 2017 23:36:46 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał: > “The more you know, the dumber you sound to stupid people.” > -- Anonymous And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" > > “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.” -- L. Frank Baum And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" > “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures > of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride > and vanity.” ― Dale Carnegie And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 04:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a50251ba-11c0-4cb9-ab3d-ec144457b826@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413950 |
On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 1:09:06 AM UTC-6, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > W dniu czwartek, 23 marca 2017 23:36:46 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał: > > > > “The more you know, the dumber you sound to stupid people.” > > -- Anonymous > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" So you don't understand that Wozzie-boy has no clothes :-)) And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) > > “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.” -- L. Frank Baum > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" So you don't understand that you are standing there naked :-)) And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) > > “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures > > of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride > > and vanity.” ― Dale Carnegie > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" So you don't understand that Dale described you to a tee :-)) And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) Truth is "gobleygook" to you. How sad!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 05:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9554a6c6-41a9-4447-96dc-bbf093fdd700@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #413964 |
W dniu piątek, 24 marca 2017 12:51:15 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał: > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 1:09:06 AM UTC-6, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > > W dniu czwartek, 23 marca 2017 23:36:46 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał: > > > > > > “The more you know, the dumber you sound to stupid people.” > > > -- Anonymous > > > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" > > So you don't understand that Wozzie-boy has no clothes :-)) > And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) “The more you know, the dumber you sound to stupid people.” -- Anonymous > > > > “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.” -- L. Frank Baum > > > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" > > So you don't understand that you are standing there naked :-)) > And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) “Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking.” -- L. Frank Baum > > > “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures > > > of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride > > > and vanity.” ― Dale Carnegie > > > > And they scream "no content!!! gobledygook!!! > > irrelevant!!! syntax schmyntax!!!" > > So you don't understand that Dale described you to a tee :-)) > And you prove once again that you have no content :-)) > Truth is "gobleygook" to you. How sad! “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride and vanity.” ― Dale Carnegie
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 09:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnod9okh.vb0.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413923 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: ----snip---- > Although I do not agree with the entirety of Hirsch's thesis, So you, who are not an educator, have the arrogance to disagree on a matter of education with an educator of Hirsch's standing? > he makes some valid points. How very generous you are to concede that he might have got something right. > Many of the points that he makes have direct applicability to the > debate that I have had with Ned and Matt. None of those you listed do. One that you failed to list us a good understanding of English. Would that be because you don't regard a good understanding of the world's most widely used and abused communications protocol as having any importance? > Both Ned and Matt appear to be completely lacking in the basic shared > pool of knowledge that facilitates communication in physics. Theory is not knowledge. > There is no hope for me to convince either of them that they could > be wrong, That's a lie, You've already corrected me on one error. AND I acknowledged it. (That's a thing that none of you fucks ever do.) > since neither of them are capable of understanding what I say. That's "is capable", dimwit. > Every one of my sentences gets misconstrued. Crap. That straw man bullshit you keep shovelling out indicates one of two things: either you're dishonestly evading issues that come up, or *you* are misconstruing *my* statements. Given your blatant misrepresentation of the LLR precedure, I tend toward regarding the former as the more probable. OTOH, some of the "conclusions" you leap to are quite mind-bogglingly stupid: that inclines me towards the latter. Perhaps you do a mixture of the two, ay? Misconstruction because you don't understand English well enough, and dishonest evasion because you can't handle facts. Mmmm, yair: I think I'll go with that. > So I'm walking away. Very wise. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 08:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnod9mgd.vb0.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413917 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: ----snip---- > In order to discuss physics, there have to be at least SOME points of > agreement on physical law. It wasn't quite so bad when Ned asserted > that cosmic redshift does not necessarily imply an expanding universe, Oh, look at the open mind! > because a fair number of reasonable people used to believe that, That's no reason to accept a statement as worthy of debate. > and discussions of that point would lead into demonstrations that > "tired light" arguments don't work, etc. "Tired light", ay? You should tell Roberts about that one. > But when Ned begins denying ANY RELATIONSHIP AT ALL between > Doppler effect and radial velocity, I didn't do that. As I;ve said before, take your straw nab vullshit and sgove it whare the sun don'y shinew. > shrugging off my arguments about radar guns, spacecraft tracking, > binary stars, galactic rotation and so forth as "irrelevant", That's exactly what they are. But as I said, "something that IS relevant is the GR explanation of the gravitational lense effect". > at that point I just have to walk away. You're not very good at reading, are you? Let me expand that clue for you: light is accelerated towards gravitational sources.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-24 11:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnoda228.bq5.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #413917 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: ----snip---- > In order to discuss physics, there have to be at least SOME points of > agreement on physical law. It wasn't quite so bad when Ned asserted > that cosmic redshift does not necessarily imply an expanding universe, Oh, look at the open mind! > because a fair number of reasonable people used to believe that, That's no reason to accept a statement as worthy of debate. > and discussions of that point would lead into demonstrations that > "tired light" arguments don't work, etc. "Tired light", ay? You should tell Roberts about that one. > But when Ned begins denying ANY RELATIONSHIP AT ALL between > Doppler effect and radial velocity, I didn't do that. As I've said before, take your straw man bullshit and shove it where the sun don't shinew. > shrugging off my arguments about radar guns, spacecraft tracking, > binary stars, galactic rotation and so forth as "irrelevant", That's exactly what they are. But as I said, "something that IS relevant is the GR explanation of the gravitational lense effect". > at that point I just have to walk away. You're not very good at reading, are you? Let me expand that clue for you: light is accelerated towards gravitational sources.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-25 14:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ob6evc$1d14$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #413917 |
On 3/23/2017 3:55 PM, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 3:27:36 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 3/23/2017 3:08 PM, Ned Latham wrote: >>> Oh, but I am. I have already corrected my misconception of you as >>> being anything like an honest debater. >> >> The problem you face, Ned, is that you believe that validation comes in >> the form of winning arguments. It's known as being a "right-fighter", >> and that attitude oozes out of every syllable you type. I imagine the >> only thing that is more frustrating to you than your loneliness is when >> people stop engaging with you in the confrontational debate manner you >> find so enjoyable. > > In order to discuss physics, there have to be at least SOME points of agreement > on physical law. It wasn't quite so bad when Ned asserted that cosmic redshift > does not necessarily imply an expanding universe, because a fair number of > reasonable people used to believe that, and discussions of that point would lead > into demonstrations that "tired light" arguments don't work, etc. > > But when Ned begins denying ANY RELATIONSHIP AT ALL between Doppler effect and > radial velocity, shrugging off my arguments about radar guns, spacecraft > tracking, binary stars, galactic rotation and so forth as "irrelevant", at that > point I just have to walk away. > > Exactly. The point of physics is that laws have broad and varied applications. I am amused by people who are just hunky-dory fine with Doppler shift and radial velocity in hot-gas tubes, radar guns, planetary spectra, and moving transmitters but are willing to insist that there should be NO EXPECTATION that this relationship explains anything in their pet application like cosmology. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web