Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #470005 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-31 08:07 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-12-07 09:49 +0000 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 28 participants
Thread has 1627 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1627 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 08:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 15:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 10:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 17:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 11:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 18:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 12:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 21:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 21:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 14:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-01 09:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 11:23 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 09:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 14:44 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 11:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 15:57 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 17:25 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 14:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 19:51 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 22:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-31 20:37 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 12:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 12:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 21:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 16:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-01 00:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 18:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 01:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 20:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 01:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 20:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 03:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 05:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Fattore Nzavecchia <avcir@valecw.ba> - 2018-09-01 12:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 09:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 09:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 11:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 13:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 22:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 16:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 22:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 04:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 05:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 05:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 06:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Jeanclaude Erald <urdu@iufienv.vu> - 2018-09-02 12:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 07:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 18:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 20:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 19:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 21:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 03:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 05:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 10:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 18:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 19:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 19:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 20:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 20:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-04 03:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 07:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-04 14:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 16:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-04 23:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 18:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 00:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 18:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 08:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 15:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 09:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 19:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 13:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-05 14:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-05 19:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 21:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 19:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 23:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 22:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 02:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 20:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 05:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 07:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 07:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 07:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 10:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Haných Ltskáš <lnni@yawlucla.ha> - 2018-09-06 15:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 13:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 21:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 22:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 23:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 14:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 15:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 22:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 16:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-07 00:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 21:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-07 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 13:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 00:45 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 01:04 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 16:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 16:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 09:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 17:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 19:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 13:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 22:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 19:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 16:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 00:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 21:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-07 05:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 07:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 11:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 19:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 13:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 22:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 12:20 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 16:13 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 07:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 16:51 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 11:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 12:19 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 14:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 16:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 20:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 07:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 18:53 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 10:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 05:21 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 10:36 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 17:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 12:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 05:22 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 10:40 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 16:51 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 20:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 10:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 14:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 04:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 11:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 06:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 12:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 19:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 19:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 20:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 21:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 04:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-10 05:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 06:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 08:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 08:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 03:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 12:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 06:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 17:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 09:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 04:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 12:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 08:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-11 10:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-07 21:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 22:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 01:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 18:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 15:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 09:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 17:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 12:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 17:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 22:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 04:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 11:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 06:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 20:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 01:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 02:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 19:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 03:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 13:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 21:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 14:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 01:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 18:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 02:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 20:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-13 12:10 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-09-13 17:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-19 22:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 15:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-09 05:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-09 14:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-09 23:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 17:23 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 23:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 00:27 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 20:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 11:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 07:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-10 21:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-12 12:36 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 17:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 23:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 00:27 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 20:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 14:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 08:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 17:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 11:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 19:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 18:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-11 18:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-12 04:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 02:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 23:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 11:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 06:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 13:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 07:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 14:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 05:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 13:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-13 06:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 08:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 19:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 14:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 22:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 15:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-13 23:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 16:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 01:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 18:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 03:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 01:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 18:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-13 20:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 21:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-14 05:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 07:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 14:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 10:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 20:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 13:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 20:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 14:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 21:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 16:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 11:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 09:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-16 00:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 22:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-16 08:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-16 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 13:14 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-16 15:38 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 07:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 12:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 19:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 13:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 01:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 18:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 12:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-16 23:18 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-16 19:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 20:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 16:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 12:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 21:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 15:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 23:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 22:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 11:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 07:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 07:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 08:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 11:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 13:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 03:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 08:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-18 10:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 00:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 18:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 04:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 07:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 08:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 09:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 09:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 10:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 12:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 09:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 13:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 16:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 20:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 20:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 20:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 20:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 13:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 14:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 14:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 15:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 15:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 17:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 17:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 19:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 20:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 05:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-21 16:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 09:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 16:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 18:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 02:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-22 06:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 15:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 05:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 11:43 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 12:01 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 15:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-22 07:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-22 07:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 11:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 05:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-23 03:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Rhett Joyner <udof@rsrrfirwv.on> - 2018-09-23 10:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 10:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-22 21:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 06:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 03:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 15:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 20:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 02:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-24 07:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 11:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-24 15:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 08:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 07:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 15:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-27 11:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 22:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 12:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-29 06:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 01:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 23:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:29 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 08:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 22:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-10-04 08:15 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-10-04 21:48 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@example.invalid> - 2018-10-06 15:27 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-28 23:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 22:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 14:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 21:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 06:29 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 21:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 16:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 16:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 00:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 10:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 03:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 06:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 19:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 21:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 15:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-26 09:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 08:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 03:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 15:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 20:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 14:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 23:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-23 19:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 07:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 19:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-26 20:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 12:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 05:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-27 10:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 20:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 02:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 18:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-24 11:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 22:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 03:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 07:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 15:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 15:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 21:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 12:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 05:23 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:55 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 00:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 02:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 18:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 17:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 04:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 21:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 23:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 00:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 12:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 06:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 11:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 14:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 21:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 19:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 02:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 08:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 17:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 15:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 02:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 21:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 11:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 05:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 12:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 05:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-09 20:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 13:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 09:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 14:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 13:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 14:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 22:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 17:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 13:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-12 09:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 17:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-12 19:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 02:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 08:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 16:10 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 12:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 21:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 15:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 23:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 16:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-14 13:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-14 16:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 14:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 08:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 18:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 17:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 02:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 21:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 11:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 16:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 18:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 08:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 16:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 08:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 18:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 17:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 11:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 21:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 15:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 18:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 22:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 15:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 01:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-19 05:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 12:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-19 15:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 15:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 09:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 16:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 10:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 20:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 16:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 09:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-22 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 12:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-22 19:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 16:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 04:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-23 08:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 18:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-24 08:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-24 17:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-24 18:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-24 23:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-25 08:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 08:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-31 08:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 10:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-31 17:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 13:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 09:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 14:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 21:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 07:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 15:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 10:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 22:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 19:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 13:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-03 13:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-03 14:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 22:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:10 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-04 12:53 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Buck Dehner <uktoa@yswdoez.cb> - 2018-11-04 12:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-04 13:35 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-04 11:46 -0800
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 16:33 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:06 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 00:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:21 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 01:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 02:03 -0500
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 17:00 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 14:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 19:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 09:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-31 23:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 14:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 10:17 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 18:24 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 10:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 09:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 20:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 22:48 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 17:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 04:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 05:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 10:13 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 18:20 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 10:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 18:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 12:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 07:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 17:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 11:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-09 20:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 13:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 08:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 09:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 14:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 22:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 21:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 14:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 22:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 17:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 13:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-12 06:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 12:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 23:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 04:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 12:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 19:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 23:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 00:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 15:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 21:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 04:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 18:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-30 22:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Talk.Origins@aol.com - 2018-10-03 03:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 13:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 14:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 03:32 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 21:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-06 16:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-12-06 10:00 -0800
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-07 09:49 +0000
Page 28 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 26 27 [28] 29 30 … 50 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 16:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2p5h$1fdf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473946 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 1:52:04 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:57:13 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> No, it is not constitutional. You cannot amend the Constitution by >>>>> Supreme Court rulings. >>>> >>>> That is not what the Supreme Court does. What they do is assess whether the >>>> Constitution is being upheld by legislation passed by legislative bodies. >>>> In the case of federal lands, the Supreme Court did not amend the >>>> Constitution. They ruled that the laws supporting the federal control of >>>> lands was constitutional. Now, a private citizen can disagree with a >>>> decision of ye Supreme Court, but they cannot sensibly question whether the >>>> Supreme Court is the identified body in charge of making those decisions — >>>> that power vested in the Supreme Court is clearly called out in the >>>> Constitution. I am amused by people like Ammon Bundy, who take it upon >>>> themselves to usurp the function of the Supreme Court and simultaneously >>>> claim that they are doing that to uphold the Constitution. I see that Mr. >>>> Bundy has managed to sway you into believing that nonsense. >>> >>> I know exactly what the Supreme Court does, and I know what the >>> Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to do. The Constitution empowers >>> the Supreme Court to make final judgments in cases that are brought before it. >> >> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >> for hearing in the Supreme Court? > > However the Supreme Court decides. I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. > The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >> >>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>> anything else in the federal government. >> >> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >> reading comprehension problem. > > No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not claim what you said I claimed. > The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years > because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. >> >>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>> to do. They are two different things. >> >> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >> > Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood suffice? > >>>> I am not a party member. I am an independent voter. Notice that my being an >>>> independent voter does not guarantee that I am going to agree with you. Now >>>> does my disagreement with you make me a party member. That kind of >>>> virulent us vs. them demonizing is exactly where this country has gone >>>> south, and you are as guilty of it as any politician in office. >>>> >>>>> You party members say that the Supreme Court is a Supreme dictatorship, >>>>> and the only reason for an executive branch of government is to appoint >>>>> Supreme Court justices to be approved by Congress, which is no longer a >>>>> legislative branch, but instead exists as a place for political party >>>>> politicians to put money they have borrowed on public credit in their own >>>>> pockets and to approve Supreme Court appointments. >>> > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 09:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5c7f6c90-74ce-4d90-b543-8562d0791a48@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473957 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> > >> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted > >> for hearing in the Supreme Court? > > > > However the Supreme Court decides. > > I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the > charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have > original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate > jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, that I never learned anything from you? What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the Constitution means? But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? > > > The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. > >> > >>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than > >>> anything else in the federal government. > >> > >> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a > >> reading comprehension problem. > > > > No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. > > Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not > claim what you said I claimed. > No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? > > The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years > > because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. > >> > >>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in > >>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was > >>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time > >>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to > >>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme > >>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court > >>> to do. They are two different things. > >> > >> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates > >> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. > >> > > Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. > > Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood > suffice? > I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. > >>>> I am not a party member. I am an independent voter. Notice that my being an > >>>> independent voter does not guarantee that I am going to agree with you. Now > >>>> does my disagreement with you make me a party member. That kind of > >>>> virulent us vs. them demonizing is exactly where this country has gone > >>>> south, and you are as guilty of it as any politician in office. > >>>> > >>>>> You party members say that the Supreme Court is a Supreme dictatorship, > >>>>> and the only reason for an executive branch of government is to appoint > >>>>> Supreme Court justices to be approved by Congress, which is no longer a > >>>>> legislative branch, but instead exists as a place for political party > >>>>> politicians to put money they have borrowed on public credit in their own > >>>>> pockets and to approve Supreme Court appointments. > >>>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 16:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2qt2$1ijl$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473968 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> >>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? >>> >>> However the Supreme Court decides. >> >> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the >> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have >> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate >> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. > > Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, > that I never learned anything from you? > What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. > Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the > Constitution means? So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? > But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were > going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? >> >>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >>>> >>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>>>> anything else in the federal government. >>>> >>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >>>> reading comprehension problem. >>> >>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. >> >> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not >> claim what you said I claimed. >> > No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I > was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? > >>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years >>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. >>>> >>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>>>> to do. They are two different things. >>>> >>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >>>> >>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. >> >> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood >> suffice? >> > > I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. > > >>>>>> I am not a party member. I am an independent voter. Notice that my being an >>>>>> independent voter does not guarantee that I am going to agree with you. Now >>>>>> does my disagreement with you make me a party member. That kind of >>>>>> virulent us vs. them demonizing is exactly where this country has gone >>>>>> south, and you are as guilty of it as any politician in office. >>>>>> >>>>>>> You party members say that the Supreme Court is a Supreme dictatorship, >>>>>>> and the only reason for an executive branch of government is to appoint >>>>>>> Supreme Court justices to be approved by Congress, which is no longer a >>>>>>> legislative branch, but instead exists as a place for political party >>>>>>> politicians to put money they have borrowed on public credit in their own >>>>>>> pockets and to approve Supreme Court appointments. >>>>> > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 14:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <de6a0a5a-f183-47cd-b9f1-853458b0cbaf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473970 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >>>> > >>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted > >>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? > >>> > >>> However the Supreme Court decides. > >> > >> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the > >> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have > >> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate > >> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. > > > > Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, > > that I never learned anything from you? > > What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. > > Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the > > Constitution means? > > So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are > incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan politics because they are appointed for life. > > But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were > > going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? > >> > >>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. > >>>> > >>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than > >>>>> anything else in the federal government. > >>>> > >>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a > >>>> reading comprehension problem. > >>> > >>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. > >> > >> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not > >> claim what you said I claimed. > >> > > No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I > > was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? > > Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? > I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does with the news media. > >>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years > >>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. > >>>> > >>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in > >>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was > >>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time > >>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to > >>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme > >>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court > >>>>> to do. They are two different things. > >>>> > >>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates > >>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. > >>>> > >>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. > >> > >> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood > >> suffice? > >> > > > > I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. > > Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. > Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. > > > >>>>>> I am not a party member. I am an independent voter. Notice that my being an > >>>>>> independent voter does not guarantee that I am going to agree with you. Now > >>>>>> does my disagreement with you make me a party member. That kind of > >>>>>> virulent us vs. them demonizing is exactly where this country has gone > >>>>>> south, and you are as guilty of it as any politician in office. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> You party members say that the Supreme Court is a Supreme dictatorship, > >>>>>>> and the only reason for an executive branch of government is to appoint > >>>>>>> Supreme Court justices to be approved by Congress, which is no longer a > >>>>>>> legislative branch, but instead exists as a place for political party > >>>>>>> politicians to put money they have borrowed on public credit in their own > >>>>>>> pockets and to approve Supreme Court appointments.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp47o2$1mpb$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474017 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? >>>>> >>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. >>>> >>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the >>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have >>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate >>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. >>> >>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, >>> that I never learned anything from you? >>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. >>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the >>> Constitution means? >> >> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are >> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? > > No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. > The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government > because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents > the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan > politics because they are appointed for life. What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of it. > >>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were >>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? >>>> >>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >>>>>> >>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. >>>>>> >>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >>>>>> reading comprehension problem. >>>>> >>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. >>>> >>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not >>>> claim what you said I claimed. >>>> >>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I >>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? >> >> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? >> > I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such > thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of what you are saying is a joke. > If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to > get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does with the news media. >>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years >>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. >>>>>> >>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >>>>>> >>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. >>>> >>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood >>>> suffice? >>>> >>> >>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. >> >> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. >> > Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. >>> >>>>>>>> I am not a party member. I am an independent voter. Notice that my being an >>>>>>>> independent voter does not guarantee that I am going to agree with you. Now >>>>>>>> does my disagreement with you make me a party member. That kind of >>>>>>>> virulent us vs. them demonizing is exactly where this country has gone >>>>>>>> south, and you are as guilty of it as any politician in office. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You party members say that the Supreme Court is a Supreme dictatorship, >>>>>>>>> and the only reason for an executive branch of government is to appoint >>>>>>>>> Supreme Court justices to be approved by Congress, which is no longer a >>>>>>>>> legislative branch, but instead exists as a place for political party >>>>>>>>> politicians to put money they have borrowed on public credit in their own >>>>>>>>> pockets and to approve Supreme Court appointments. > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 23:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c674108a-a522-45c1-b627-ce85f9e093e5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474040 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:16:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted > >>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? > >>>>> > >>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. > >>>> > >>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the > >>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have > >>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate > >>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. > >>> > >>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, > >>> that I never learned anything from you? > >>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. > >>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the > >>> Constitution means? > >> > >> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are > >> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? > > > > No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. > > The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government > > because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents > > the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan > > politics because they are appointed for life. > > What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and > that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches > of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no > interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from > becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and > unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of > it. You are very reluctant to give up the judicial dictatorship. I can understand how you would be. To people who believe in European socialism, judges appointed for life seem like the ultimate authority in government. But I was not lying when I said that the Democratic Party has the federal judiciary out of their jurisdiction. They put it there to enforce slavery, and they have not relinquished their control. But it is all coming apart on them now. What they are doing was not started by the Constitution. It was started by King James I of England because he did not like Parliament and started appointing judges given the specific task of striking down acts of Parliament. That started a Civil War in England during the reign of the next king, Charles I. The idea of "judicial review" was held over in American colonial government and passed down to state governments, but did not appear in federal government until 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. See how upset the Democrats are? They know their political party is on the way out. See how puzzled the Republicans are? They cannot understand what is happening. That leaves independent voters. You go ahead and try to turn them into a political party. I will watch what happens. > > > >>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were > >>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? > >>>> > >>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than > >>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a > >>>>>> reading comprehension problem. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. > >>>> > >>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not > >>>> claim what you said I claimed. > >>>> > >>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I > >>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? > >> > >> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? > >> > > I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such > > thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. > > I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this > is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of > what you are saying is a joke. > > > If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to > > get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does with the news media. > >>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in the United States for sixty years > >>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in > >>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was > >>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time > >>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to > >>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme > >>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court > >>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates > >>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. > >>>>>> > >>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. > >>>> > >>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood > >>>> suffice? > >>>> > >>> > >>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. > >> > >> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. > >> > > Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. > > You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said > anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, > then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you > are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. > No, I am in my 70's, but, as you say, I should not avoid walking a mile. But I have to have a reason to walk a mile. I don't just do it because I have nothing else to do. I have other things to do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 06:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp4bjn$1sag$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474044 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:16:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >>>>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the >>>>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have >>>>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate >>>>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. >>>>> >>>>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, >>>>> that I never learned anything from you? >>>>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. >>>>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the >>>>> Constitution means? >>>> >>>> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are >>>> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? >>> >>> No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. >>> The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government >>> because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents >>> the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan >>> politics because they are appointed for life. >> >> What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and >> that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches >> of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no >> interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from >> becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and >> unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of >> it. > > You are very reluctant to give up the judicial dictatorship. I’m very reluctant to give up the Constitution and the checks and balances built into it. You are urging me to give up on the Constitution but that is just not going to happen. Judges not having a term limit was done on purpose, and you think that idea is a bad one, and so you want to scrap that design. I don’t. I think wanting to scrap the Constitution is sedition. Perhaps the thing to do for you is to move a little further out in the desert and secede from the Union. You could found a township out there. I’d be interested to see how that goes for you and whatever band you muster. > I can understand how you would be. To people who believe in European > socialism, judges appointed for life seem like the ultimate authority in > government. But I was not lying when I said that the Democratic Party > has the federal judiciary out of their jurisdiction. They put it there > to enforce slavery, and they have not relinquished their control. But it > is all coming apart on them now. What they are doing was not started by > the Constitution. It was started by King James I of England because he > did not like Parliament and started appointing judges given the specific > task of striking down acts of Parliament. That started a Civil War in > England during the reign of the next king, Charles I. The idea of > "judicial review" was held over in American colonial government and > passed down to state governments, but did not appear in federal > government until 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. See how upset the > Democrats are? They know their political party is on the way out. See > how puzzled the Republicans are? They cannot understand what is > happening. That leaves independent voters. You go ahead and try to turn > them into a political party. I will watch what happens. >>> >>>>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were >>>>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? >>>>>> >>>>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>>>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >>>>>>>> reading comprehension problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not >>>>>> claim what you said I claimed. >>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I >>>>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? >>>> >>>> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? >>>> >>> I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such >>> thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. >> >> I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this >> is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of >> what you are saying is a joke. >> >>> If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to >>> get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does >>> with the news media. >>>>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in >>> the United States for sixty years >>>>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>>>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>>>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>>>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>>>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>>>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>>>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >>>>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood >>>>>> suffice? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. >>>> >>>> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. >>>> >>> Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. >> >> You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said >> anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, >> then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you >> are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. >> > No, I am in my 70's, but, as you say, I should not avoid walking a mile. > But I have to have a reason to walk a mile. I don't just do it because I > have nothing else to do. I have other things to do. > I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the night about what he is accomplishing. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 06:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp4c0p$1ssk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474047 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:16:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >>>>>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the >>>>>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have >>>>>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate >>>>>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, >>>>>> that I never learned anything from you? >>>>>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. >>>>>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the >>>>>> Constitution means? >>>>> >>>>> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are >>>>> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? >>>> >>>> No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. >>>> The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government >>>> because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents >>>> the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan >>>> politics because they are appointed for life. >>> >>> What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and >>> that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches >>> of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no >>> interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from >>> becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and >>> unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of >>> it. >> >> You are very reluctant to give up the judicial dictatorship. > > I’m very reluctant to give up the Constitution and the checks and balances > built into it. You are urging me to give up on the Constitution but that is > just not going to happen. Judges not having a term limit was done on > purpose, and you think that idea is a bad one, and so you want to scrap > that design. I don’t. I think wanting to scrap the Constitution is > sedition. Perhaps the thing to do for you is to move a little further out > in the desert and secede from the Union. You could found a township out > there. I’d be interested to see how that goes for you and whatever band you > muster. > >> I can understand how you would be. To people who believe in European >> socialism, judges appointed for life seem like the ultimate authority in >> government. But I was not lying when I said that the Democratic Party >> has the federal judiciary out of their jurisdiction. They put it there >> to enforce slavery, and they have not relinquished their control. But it >> is all coming apart on them now. What they are doing was not started by >> the Constitution. It was started by King James I of England because he >> did not like Parliament and started appointing judges given the specific >> task of striking down acts of Parliament. That started a Civil War in >> England during the reign of the next king, Charles I. The idea of >> "judicial review" was held over in American colonial government and >> passed down to state governments, but did not appear in federal >> government until 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. See how upset the >> Democrats are? They know their political party is on the way out. See >> how puzzled the Republicans are? They cannot understand what is >> happening. That leaves independent voters. You go ahead and try to turn >> them into a political party. I will watch what happens. >>>> >>>>>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were >>>>>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>>>>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >>>>>>>>> reading comprehension problem. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not >>>>>>> claim what you said I claimed. >>>>>>> >>>>>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I >>>>>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? >>>>> >>>>> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? >>>>> >>>> I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such >>>> thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. >>> >>> I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this >>> is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of >>> what you are saying is a joke. >>> >>>> If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to >>>> get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does >>>> with the news media. >>>>>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in >>>> the United States for sixty years >>>>>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>>>>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>>>>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>>>>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>>>>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>>>>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>>>>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >>>>>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood >>>>>>> suffice? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. >>>>> >>>>> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. >>>>> >>>> Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. >>> >>> You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said >>> anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, >>> then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you >>> are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. >>> >> No, I am in my 70's, but, as you say, I should not avoid walking a mile. >> But I have to have a reason to walk a mile. I don't just do it because I >> have nothing else to do. I have other things to do. >> > > I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > night about what he is accomplishing. > > > Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is morning. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 06:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <52ab1385-1366-45e7-a788-98d3d4e08fac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474048 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:29:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > > there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > > yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > > is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > > little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > > night about what he is accomplishing. > > > > > > > > Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting > from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is > morning. > Now that is just wrong. You seem to be saying that people who see the sun before others are better. That is at least as bad as Trump making fun of Judge Kavenaugh's accuser.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp5bji$1nog$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474064 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:29:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and >>> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for >>> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump >>> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a >>> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the >>> night about what he is accomplishing. >>> >>> >>> >> >> Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting >> from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is >> morning. >> > Now that is just wrong. You seem to be saying that people who see the > sun before others are better. Heck no. Different, not better. Do you know the difference? > That is at least as bad as Trump making fun of Judge Kavenaugh's accuser. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 09:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <da2d1c99-c53f-4c31-9ebe-a7c21e0639e6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474077 |
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 8:28:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:29:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >>> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > >>> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > >>> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > >>> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > >>> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > >>> night about what he is accomplishing. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting > >> from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is > >> morning. > >> > > Now that is just wrong. You seem to be saying that people who see the > > sun before others are better. > > Heck no. Different, not better. Do you know the difference? > Sun worship is a form of idolatry. The ancient Egyptians found that out from experience.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp5phe$in1$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474088 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 8:28:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:29:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>>> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and >>>>> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for >>>>> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump >>>>> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a >>>>> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the >>>>> night about what he is accomplishing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting >>>> from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is >>>> morning. >>>> >>> Now that is just wrong. You seem to be saying that people who see the >>> sun before others are better. >> >> Heck no. Different, not better. Do you know the difference? >> > Sun worship is a form of idolatry. The ancient Egyptians found that out from experience. > So I guess the answer is no, you don’t know the difference. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 15:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7596d209-19b1-4b55-a609-bf9659fa9163@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474104 |
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 12:26:42 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 8:28:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:29:48 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> > >>>>> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > >>>>> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > >>>>> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > >>>>> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > >>>>> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > >>>>> night about what he is accomplishing. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Come to think of it, it is the middle of the night where you are posting > >>>> from your trailer to social media. How Trumpish of you. Where I am it is > >>>> morning. > >>>> > >>> Now that is just wrong. You seem to be saying that people who see the > >>> sun before others are better. > >> > >> Heck no. Different, not better. Do you know the difference? > >> > > Sun worship is a form of idolatry. The ancient Egyptians found that out from experience. > > > > So I guess the answer is no, you don’t know the difference. > I guess not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 06:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5d987bd4-0c00-42d0-81d3-ff8cce2701d6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474047 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:22:50 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:16:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted > >>>>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the > >>>>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have > >>>>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate > >>>>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. > >>>>> > >>>>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, > >>>>> that I never learned anything from you? > >>>>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. > >>>>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the > >>>>> Constitution means? > >>>> > >>>> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are > >>>> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? > >>> > >>> No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. > >>> The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government > >>> because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents > >>> the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan > >>> politics because they are appointed for life. > >> > >> What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and > >> that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches > >> of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no > >> interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from > >> becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and > >> unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of > >> it. > > > > You are very reluctant to give up the judicial dictatorship. > > I’m very reluctant to give up the Constitution and the checks and balances > built into it. You are urging me to give up on the Constitution but that is > just not going to happen. Judges not having a term limit was done on > purpose, and you think that idea is a bad one, and so you want to scrap > that design. I don’t. I think wanting to scrap the Constitution is > sedition. Perhaps the thing to do for you is to move a little further out > in the desert and secede from the Union. You could found a township out > there. I’d be interested to see how that goes for you and whatever band you > muster. > > > I can understand how you would be. To people who believe in European > > socialism, judges appointed for life seem like the ultimate authority in > > government. But I was not lying when I said that the Democratic Party > > has the federal judiciary out of their jurisdiction. They put it there > > to enforce slavery, and they have not relinquished their control. But it > > is all coming apart on them now. What they are doing was not started by > > the Constitution. It was started by King James I of England because he > > did not like Parliament and started appointing judges given the specific > > task of striking down acts of Parliament. That started a Civil War in > > England during the reign of the next king, Charles I. The idea of > > "judicial review" was held over in American colonial government and > > passed down to state governments, but did not appear in federal > > government until 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. See how upset the > > Democrats are? They know their political party is on the way out. See > > how puzzled the Republicans are? They cannot understand what is > > happening. That leaves independent voters. You go ahead and try to turn > > them into a political party. I will watch what happens. > >>> > >>>>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were > >>>>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than > >>>>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a > >>>>>>>> reading comprehension problem. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not > >>>>>> claim what you said I claimed. > >>>>>> > >>>>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I > >>>>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? > >>>> > >>>> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? > >>>> > >>> I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such > >>> thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. > >> > >> I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this > >> is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of > >> what you are saying is a joke. > >> > >>> If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to > >>> get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does > >>> with the news media. > >>>>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in > >>> the United States for sixty years > >>>>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the Democratic Party. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in > >>>>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was > >>>>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time > >>>>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to > >>>>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme > >>>>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court > >>>>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates > >>>>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood > >>>>>> suffice? > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. > >>>> > >>>> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. > >>>> > >>> Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. > >> > >> You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said > >> anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, > >> then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you > >> are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. > >> > > No, I am in my 70's, but, as you say, I should not avoid walking a mile. > > But I have to have a reason to walk a mile. I don't just do it because I > > have nothing else to do. I have other things to do. > > > > I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > night about what he is accomplishing. Well, I know how important it seems to you to plan my life for me. I have an idea. Why don't you get a Twitter account and try to convince Mr. Trump that there is a length contraction? I think you would have better success with him.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp5bji$1nog$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474063 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 11:22:50 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:16:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:31:34 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:01:57 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, exactly. And upon what matters are these cases brought to be accepted >>>>>>>>>> for hearing in the Supreme Court? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However the Supreme Court decides. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think they are operating under some principle, Robert, if you look to the >>>>>>>> charge of the Supreme Court. Hint: over what kinds of cases does it have >>>>>>>> original jurisdiction, and over what kinds of cases does it have appellate >>>>>>>> jurisdiction? A Constitutional scholar like you should know this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Read it in the Constitution. See how that is done? What did you think, >>>>>>> that I never learned anything from you? >>>>>>> What I am talking about is reality. You have nine feeble-minded lawyers. >>>>>>> Nine feeble-minded lawyers are going to even have a clue about what the >>>>>>> Constitution means? >>>>>> >>>>>> So you are in favor of disbanding the Supreme Court because they are >>>>>> incapable of doing what they are charged to do, because they are lawyers? >>>>> >>>>> No, there has to be a Supreme Court, but they have to be de-politicized. >>>>> The problem is that they are now the most powerful branch of government >>>>> because they nullify Congress, the branch of government that represents >>>>> the people. Federal judges are a dictatorship if they engage in partisan >>>>> politics because they are appointed for life. >>>> >>>> What you call nullification is what is known as checks and balances, and >>>> that is what the designers of the Constitution built in. All three branches >>>> of the government represent the people, not just the legislative. I have no >>>> interest in removing the checks and balances that keep Congress from >>>> becoming too powerful. I believe in the design of the Constitution and >>>> unlike you I have no desire to redesign it or strip away key features of >>>> it. >>> >>> You are very reluctant to give up the judicial dictatorship. >> >> I’m very reluctant to give up the Constitution and the checks and balances >> built into it. You are urging me to give up on the Constitution but that is >> just not going to happen. Judges not having a term limit was done on >> purpose, and you think that idea is a bad one, and so you want to scrap >> that design. I don’t. I think wanting to scrap the Constitution is >> sedition. Perhaps the thing to do for you is to move a little further out >> in the desert and secede from the Union. You could found a township out >> there. I’d be interested to see how that goes for you and whatever band you >> muster. >> >>> I can understand how you would be. To people who believe in European >>> socialism, judges appointed for life seem like the ultimate authority in >>> government. But I was not lying when I said that the Democratic Party >>> has the federal judiciary out of their jurisdiction. They put it there >>> to enforce slavery, and they have not relinquished their control. But it >>> is all coming apart on them now. What they are doing was not started by >>> the Constitution. It was started by King James I of England because he >>> did not like Parliament and started appointing judges given the specific >>> task of striking down acts of Parliament. That started a Civil War in >>> England during the reign of the next king, Charles I. The idea of >>> "judicial review" was held over in American colonial government and >>> passed down to state governments, but did not appear in federal >>> government until 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. See how upset the >>> Democrats are? They know their political party is on the way out. See >>> how puzzled the Republicans are? They cannot understand what is >>> happening. That leaves independent voters. You go ahead and try to turn >>> them into a political party. I will watch what happens. >>>>> >>>>>>> But you claim that they constitute a judicial dictatorship. You were >>>>>>> going to send the FBI to kick down my front door, remember? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Supreme Court can rule that it will hear or not hear any case whatsoever. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You claim it is a judicial dictatorship that is more powerful than >>>>>>>>>>> anything else in the federal government. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That statement doesn’t resemble what I actually said. You may have a >>>>>>>>>> reading comprehension problem. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No, I don't have a reading comprehension problem. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well then you have a problem telling the truth because I simply did not >>>>>>>> claim what you said I claimed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I don't have a problem telling the truth. What did you think, that I >>>>>>> was testifying before the Senate Judicial Committee? >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you only tell the truth when sworn to tell the truth? >>>>>> >>>>> I joke around a lot. Any psychiatrist can tell you that there is no such >>>>> thing as a joke. A joke can always be represented as a lie. >>>> >>>> I see. So when you say I’ve said things you know I haven’t said, then this >>>> is you just joking around. Good to know. I will keep in mind that most of >>>> what you are saying is a joke. >>>> >>>>> If I was sworn to tell the truth, I might joke around a little just to >>>>> get lawyers and psychiatrists working against me the way Trump does >>>>> with the news media. >>>>>>>>> The Supreme Court enforced slavery in >>>>> the United States for sixty years >>>>>>>>> because people like you wanted a Supreme Court controlled by the >>>>>>>>> Democratic Party. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I also know where that idea comes from. It comes from a single case in >>>>>>>>>>> 1803, Marbury v. Madison, in which the Supreme Court claimed that it was >>>>>>>>>>> striking down an act of Congress. The Democratic Party, at that time >>>>>>>>>>> called the Republican-Democrat Party, used that Supreme Court case to >>>>>>>>>>> enforce slavery for the next sixty years. So I know what the Supreme >>>>>>>>>>> Court does, and I know what the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court >>>>>>>>>>> to do. They are two different things. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I disagree with your assessment that the United States no longer operates >>>>>>>>>> under the US Constitution. I also consider that a seditious comment. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Wonderful. Send the FBI to kick down my front door. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you have a front door? Or would just scooching over the sheer of plywood >>>>>>>> suffice? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't know. Maybe the FBI could investigate that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Try walking to the library. When you come back, you’ll see for yourself. >>>>>> >>>>> Naw, too far. I am not that young any more. >>>> >>>> You are in your 60s I recall. I don’t recall that you have ever said >>>> anything about being in a wheelchair or otherwise immobilized. If you are, >>>> then I might understand why you would rarely leave the trailer. But if you >>>> are not in a wheelchair, walking a mile is not something you should avoid. >>>> >>> No, I am in my 70's, but, as you say, I should not avoid walking a mile. >>> But I have to have a reason to walk a mile. I don't just do it because I >>> have nothing else to do. I have other things to do. >>> >> >> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and >> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for >> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump >> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a >> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the >> night about what he is accomplishing. > > Well, I know how important it seems to you to plan my life for me. I > have an idea. Why don't you get a Twitter account and try to convince > Mr. Trump that there is a length contraction? I think you would have > better success with him. > I won’t be making a twitter account, thanks. And I think on length contraction, you and Mr Trump may have a lot in common in that you don’t let evidence influence what you believe. You just choose what you believe and stick with that, no matter what. I believe that there are some very high ranking Republicans in the Executive Branch of the government who have called that being a “moron”. And since Republicans are the prevailing party, you tell me this is the information that the public gets about our leadership. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 09:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4142b304-7726-4a40-827b-8bd270dbac75@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474076 |
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 8:28:53 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and > >> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for > >> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump > >> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a > >> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the > >> night about what he is accomplishing. > > > > Well, I know how important it seems to you to plan my life for me. I > > have an idea. Why don't you get a Twitter account and try to convince > > Mr. Trump that there is a length contraction? I think you would have > > better success with him. > > > > I won’t be making a twitter account, thanks. And I think on length > contraction, you and Mr Trump may have a lot in common in that you don’t > let evidence influence what you believe. You just choose what you believe > and stick with that, no matter what. I believe that there are some very > high ranking Republicans in the Executive Branch of the government who have > called that being a “moron”. And since Republicans are the prevailing > party, you tell me this is the information that the public gets about our > leadership. Well, follow who you want to follow. I am an independent, myself. I just decide for myself what to do. The evidence I follow are the Galilean transformation equations. They do not have a length contraction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp5phe$in1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474087 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 8:28:53 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> I think you should walk a mile because the body could use the exercise and >>>> there is a lovely, air-conditioned room where you can look up facts for >>>> yourself rather than pay attention to what the Republican base of Mr Trump >>>> is saying he has accomplished. Well, the Republican base is actually a >>>> little leery of what Mr Trump puts out in social media in the middle of the >>>> night about what he is accomplishing. >>> >>> Well, I know how important it seems to you to plan my life for me. I >>> have an idea. Why don't you get a Twitter account and try to convince >>> Mr. Trump that there is a length contraction? I think you would have >>> better success with him. >>> >> >> I won’t be making a twitter account, thanks. And I think on length >> contraction, you and Mr Trump may have a lot in common in that you don’t >> let evidence influence what you believe. You just choose what you believe >> and stick with that, no matter what. I believe that there are some very >> high ranking Republicans in the Executive Branch of the government who have >> called that being a “moron”. And since Republicans are the prevailing >> party, you tell me this is the information that the public gets about our >> leadership. > > Well, follow who you want to follow. I am an independent, myself. I > just decide for myself what to do. The evidence I follow are the > Galilean transformation equations. They do not have a length contraction. > Equations are not evidence of how the world works, Robert. You may wish to deify them and make them holy writs in your mind’s eye, but that’s just you. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 08:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <286d73b5-f2e8-4b09-8035-92d4da83b5ed@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473794 |
On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 6:06:23 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> come from Montana. > >> > >> Well, it’s certainly less, but it is not zero by any stretch. And so > >> statements like “the lumber industry is completely shut down in the state > >> of Montana” or “the only wood you can find in the US all comes from Canada” > >> are exaggerations that don’t contribute positively to any credibility you > >> may want to muster. > >> > > > > I said that the only lumber companies in the northwest that were still > > going were companies like Weyerhauser that had their own trees. As for > > the sawmills you mention in Montana, they have something better than > > their own trees. They have people in state government bought off so that > > they can get trees from state land. Trees on federal lands are reserved > > for huge forest fires so that people in cities can understand that there > > is global warming. > > > >> You mention Delaware. Delaware is the sixth most densely populated state in > >> the US, partly because of its proximity to major metropolitan areas like > >> Washington DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York. Despite that, Montana > >> has cities bigger than any of the ones in Delaware. Delaware is one of > >> five states that do not have a single city with a population over 100,000 > >> as of the 2010 census, the other four being West Virginia, Vermont, Maine > >> and Wyoming, three of those being “Eastern states” you mentioned earlier. > >> Lincoln County’s population isn’t very big, partly because there are more > >> trees than people. > > > > The number of trees is not the issue. There are but few people because > > there is almost no private land. The private land that does exist is > > being bought up by out of state money. Your claim is that if the > > population increases by four thousand people in fifty years that Lincoln > > County, Montana, is overpopulated. > > I do think that federal and state lands are sequestered for a reason, and > that reason prevails more in the mountains of Montana than it does in > Delaware. > > > > > If you think it’s unfair that Delaware has a million > >> people and Lincoln County does not, the solution would be to cut down all > >> the trees. > > > > That sounds like typical city thinking, all right, except that you people > > do not cut trees down. In northwest Montana you burned about one million > > acres of trees last July. > > If all the trees have been burned down, then it seems ripe for all the > businesses that are like what’s hosted in Delaware, where there are not so > many trees keeping people from settling. Do you want trees or people in > Lincoln County? > > > Well, at least they went for a good cause. How else are city people > > going to know there is global warming? > > > > But then if you do that, I don’t know what you expect those > >> million people to do. I do note that the population of Lincoln County has > >> increased rather than decreased since you say the government removed > >> everyone’s livelihood. That’s unusual demographic behavior for a place with > >> no jobs, don’t you think? > >> > > That is correct. I do not think much about Lincoln County, Montana. As > > for the new people there, a lot of them are people who moved there to > > retire, so they do not need jobs. The people who do need jobs, the young > > people who are born there, move somewhere else because they are not going > > to be able to find work if they live in Lincoln County, Montana. > > Well, since the school enrollments have gone up in the last couple decades > along with the population, you’re telling me that all those retirees have > moved to Montana to have children. > You are once again confusing Lincoln County, Montana, with the entire state of Montana. As you said before, most of the population of Montana lives in a few cities, Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, etc. The biggest city in Lincoln County was the county seat, Libby, with a population of a couple thousand when I lived there. > > > >> As for what you said about logging in Montana, what you said earlier is > >> that the only logging in Montana are a couple of private outfits who own > >> their own trees. > > I said that the only lumber companies still operating in the Pacific > > Northwest are companies with their own trees like Weyerhauser. > > Weyerhauser is not in Montana. They are in Washington and Oregon. The > > companies you mention in Montana are logging state land. You don't log > > state land unless you know someone in state government. > > > > But now you say the only sawmills in Montana are the two > >> near Helena that harvest from state land. I know for a fact there are more > >> sawmills than that in Montana. One of them, R-Y Timber has a mill down in > >> Livingston, clear down by Bozeman, and they employ 200 workers between > >> their two mills, and they cut a sixth of all of the structural timber that > >> Montana produces. But perhaps because they are not in Lincoln County, then > >> you have as much interest in them as you do in length contraction, and as > >> far as you’re concerned, they just don’t exist. > >> > > That is correct. They do me no good, and there was no possibility of getting work there. > > Perhaps you can explain to me why there was no possibility of getting work > at any of the mills in Montana outside of Lincoln County, given that other > people did not have this problem? > Other people did have the same problem. There were thousands of lumber industry workers out of work when I left. So how do two sawmills cutting trees from state land solve that problem. It was hard to get a job in a sawmill when the industry was allowed to exist. Most sawmill jobs are semi-skilled, meaning that you have to have some experience to get them. > >>>>> Trump was elected in 2016. I don't know if you knew about that. > >>>>> Supposedly, he is trying to get the lumber industry in the United States > >>>>> going again. Everything was shut down back around 1980, which was when I > >>>>> moved to Arizona. > >>>> > >>>> Everything was shut down, you say. Except for 535 MMBF per year. > >>> Here is another mathematical error you are making. 1980 and 2018 are not the same year. It is those pesky equations you dislike so much again. I know how inconvenient they seem. > > Yes, it is really pitiful. > > > >>> I said everything was shut down in Lincoln County, Montana. Lincoln > >>> County is not the entire state of Montana. I know what a difficult > >>> concept this must seem to you. > >> > >> Well, for the record, you said you had to move to Arizona because there was > >> no logging work in Montana as a whole. Now, why someone would move to > >> Arizona because they can’t find work in their county would have to be > >> explained to me. A friend of mine lost his job at a garage in Johnson > >> County, Kansas, near Kansas City. So he moved to Eudora in Douglas County > >> and works at a garage in Lawrence. > >> > > As I understand it, you are either saying that I should have gone to > > Kansas and found work in a sawmill or gone to Livingston, Montana, and > > found work in a sawmill. The effort would have been just about as > > successful either place. There are no sawmills in Kansas, and with > > thousands of unemployed people from the lumber industry in Montana, of > > course, 400 jobs already filled in Livingston, Montana, are going to make > > a great difference to the ones who do not have jobs. Why can't poor > > uneducated people in Montana think as clearly as people who believe in > > the length contraction? > > I do think you had the obvious choice that a lot of people did when the > auto parts industry collapsed in Ohio or when the gold-mining industry > collapsed in California or when coal-mining collapsed in West Virginia. You > could either not move and find different kinds of work to do; or you can > stay in the same line of work and move to a location where that industry is > still active. I believe also that there are a number of whiners who say > that neither of these options is really acceptable and that somebody should > be blamed. > Neither of those two options is really acceptable and Democrats should be blamed. They were the ones who shut down the lumber industry. Anyway, Trump is saying that he is going to get the auto parts industry and the coal miners back to work. I know that Obama said that those industries were gone forever, and that everyone was going to have to make solar panels and semi-conductors from now on, but Trump says he is going to get American industries back in business. > >> But I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying that if the lumber > >> industry in Montana is not as big as it used to be, then it’s been > >> completely shut down as far as you’re concerned. And you’re saying that if > >> you can’t work in Lincoln County the way you wanted to, then you’re just > >> not going to do logging at all, anywhere. Instead you’ll just pick oranges > >> and collect government payouts in some faraway state and blame global > >> elitists who spent tens of thousands of dollars to make your life > >> unsatisfying. > > > > I did pick oranges in Arizona. I know how wrong that must seem to you. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp0mac$4n7$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473816 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 6:06:23 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> come from Montana. >>>> >>>> Well, it’s certainly less, but it is not zero by any stretch. And so >>>> statements like “the lumber industry is completely shut down in the state >>>> of Montana” or “the only wood you can find in the US all comes from Canada” >>>> are exaggerations that don’t contribute positively to any credibility you >>>> may want to muster. >>>> >>> >>> I said that the only lumber companies in the northwest that were still >>> going were companies like Weyerhauser that had their own trees. As for >>> the sawmills you mention in Montana, they have something better than >>> their own trees. They have people in state government bought off so that >>> they can get trees from state land. Trees on federal lands are reserved >>> for huge forest fires so that people in cities can understand that there >>> is global warming. >>> >>>> You mention Delaware. Delaware is the sixth most densely populated state in >>>> the US, partly because of its proximity to major metropolitan areas like >>>> Washington DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York. Despite that, Montana >>>> has cities bigger than any of the ones in Delaware. Delaware is one of >>>> five states that do not have a single city with a population over 100,000 >>>> as of the 2010 census, the other four being West Virginia, Vermont, Maine >>>> and Wyoming, three of those being “Eastern states” you mentioned earlier. >>>> Lincoln County’s population isn’t very big, partly because there are more >>>> trees than people. >>> >>> The number of trees is not the issue. There are but few people because >>> there is almost no private land. The private land that does exist is >>> being bought up by out of state money. Your claim is that if the >>> population increases by four thousand people in fifty years that Lincoln >>> County, Montana, is overpopulated. >> >> I do think that federal and state lands are sequestered for a reason, and >> that reason prevails more in the mountains of Montana than it does in >> Delaware. >> >>> >>> If you think it’s unfair that Delaware has a million >>>> people and Lincoln County does not, the solution would be to cut down all >>>> the trees. >>> >>> That sounds like typical city thinking, all right, except that you people >>> do not cut trees down. In northwest Montana you burned about one million >>> acres of trees last July. >> >> If all the trees have been burned down, then it seems ripe for all the >> businesses that are like what’s hosted in Delaware, where there are not so >> many trees keeping people from settling. Do you want trees or people in >> Lincoln County? >> >>> Well, at least they went for a good cause. How else are city people >>> going to know there is global warming? >>> >>> But then if you do that, I don’t know what you expect those >>>> million people to do. I do note that the population of Lincoln County has >>>> increased rather than decreased since you say the government removed >>>> everyone’s livelihood. That’s unusual demographic behavior for a place with >>>> no jobs, don’t you think? >>>> >>> That is correct. I do not think much about Lincoln County, Montana. As >>> for the new people there, a lot of them are people who moved there to >>> retire, so they do not need jobs. The people who do need jobs, the young >>> people who are born there, move somewhere else because they are not going >>> to be able to find work if they live in Lincoln County, Montana. >> >> Well, since the school enrollments have gone up in the last couple decades >> along with the population, you’re telling me that all those retirees have >> moved to Montana to have children. >> > You are once again confusing Lincoln County, Montana, with the entire state of Montana. No I’m not. The enrollments in Lincoln County have increased. Go look. > As you said before, most of the population of Montana lives in a few > cities, Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, etc. The biggest city in > Lincoln County was the county seat, Libby, with a population of a couple > thousand when I lived there. >>> >>>> As for what you said about logging in Montana, what you said earlier is >>>> that the only logging in Montana are a couple of private outfits who own >>>> their own trees. >>> I said that the only lumber companies still operating in the Pacific >>> Northwest are companies with their own trees like Weyerhauser. >>> Weyerhauser is not in Montana. They are in Washington and Oregon. The >>> companies you mention in Montana are logging state land. You don't log >>> state land unless you know someone in state government. >>> >>> But now you say the only sawmills in Montana are the two >>>> near Helena that harvest from state land. I know for a fact there are more >>>> sawmills than that in Montana. One of them, R-Y Timber has a mill down in >>>> Livingston, clear down by Bozeman, and they employ 200 workers between >>>> their two mills, and they cut a sixth of all of the structural timber that >>>> Montana produces. But perhaps because they are not in Lincoln County, then >>>> you have as much interest in them as you do in length contraction, and as >>>> far as you’re concerned, they just don’t exist. >>>> >>> That is correct. They do me no good, and there was no possibility of getting work there. >> >> Perhaps you can explain to me why there was no possibility of getting work >> at any of the mills in Montana outside of Lincoln County, given that other >> people did not have this problem? >> > Other people did have the same problem. There were thousands of lumber > industry workers out of work when I left. Right. Some stayed and changed their line of work. I imagine some lumber workers became schoolteachers to handle the rise in enrollments. Some moved to other counties where there were in fact more than two sawmills in operation, as pointed out. Some people moved out of state to continue the same line of work, just like gold miners did when they left California and instead mined in Utah, Nevada, Oregon, and Canada in the late 1800s. Same for coal miners. I gather you think it is unfair that people be asked to choose between staying in the same location but changing occupation, or staying in the same occupation but changing location. This is asking too much. > So how do two sawmills cutting trees from state land solve that problem. > It was hard to get a job in a sawmill when the industry was allowed to > exist. Most sawmill jobs are semi-skilled, meaning that you have to have > some experience to get them. > >>>>>>> Trump was elected in 2016. I don't know if you knew about that. >>>>>>> Supposedly, he is trying to get the lumber industry in the United States >>>>>>> going again. Everything was shut down back around 1980, which was when I >>>>>>> moved to Arizona. >>>>>> >>>>>> Everything was shut down, you say. Except for 535 MMBF per year. >>>>> > > Here is another mathematical error you are making. 1980 and 2018 are not > the same year. It is those pesky equations you dislike so much again. I > know how inconvenient they seem. Oh, ok, so you are living in the past, unable to get past something that happened 38 years ago. I’ve met people like that. I felt really bad for a friend whose wife divorced him long ago, and he still is trying to sue for child custody when his kids are now grown. >>> Yes, it is really pitiful. >>> >>>>> I said everything was shut down in Lincoln County, Montana. Lincoln >>>>> County is not the entire state of Montana. I know what a difficult >>>>> concept this must seem to you. >>>> >>>> Well, for the record, you said you had to move to Arizona because there was >>>> no logging work in Montana as a whole. Now, why someone would move to >>>> Arizona because they can’t find work in their county would have to be >>>> explained to me. A friend of mine lost his job at a garage in Johnson >>>> County, Kansas, near Kansas City. So he moved to Eudora in Douglas County >>>> and works at a garage in Lawrence. >>>> >>> As I understand it, you are either saying that I should have gone to >>> Kansas and found work in a sawmill or gone to Livingston, Montana, and >>> found work in a sawmill. The effort would have been just about as >>> successful either place. There are no sawmills in Kansas, and with >>> thousands of unemployed people from the lumber industry in Montana, of >>> course, 400 jobs already filled in Livingston, Montana, are going to make >>> a great difference to the ones who do not have jobs. Why can't poor >>> uneducated people in Montana think as clearly as people who believe in >>> the length contraction? >> >> I do think you had the obvious choice that a lot of people did when the >> auto parts industry collapsed in Ohio or when the gold-mining industry >> collapsed in California or when coal-mining collapsed in West Virginia. You >> could either not move and find different kinds of work to do; or you can >> stay in the same line of work and move to a location where that industry is >> still active. I believe also that there are a number of whiners who say >> that neither of these options is really acceptable and that somebody should >> be blamed. >> > Neither of those two options is really acceptable and Democrats should be blamed. Well there you have it, and I’m sorry you feel your entitlement to a job in your home town was dashed to pieces. > They were the ones who shut down the lumber industry. Anyway, Trump is > saying that he is going to get the auto parts industry and the coal > miners back to work. I know that Obama said that those industries were > gone forever, and that everyone was going to have to make solar panels > and semi-conductors from now on, but Trump says he is going to get > American industries back in business. Yeah how’s he doing on that front? Any huge improvements in hiring for coal mining? I think he said he was going to lower deficits and get Mexico to pay for a wall along the southern border of Arizona. So far, it appears he’s borrowing money and increasing the deficit to pour into a wall that the border patrol doesn’t think will help anything. >>>> But I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying that if the lumber >>>> industry in Montana is not as big as it used to be, then it’s been >>>> completely shut down as far as you’re concerned. And you’re saying that if >>>> you can’t work in Lincoln County the way you wanted to, then you’re just >>>> not going to do logging at all, anywhere. Instead you’ll just pick oranges >>>> and collect government payouts in some faraway state and blame global >>>> elitists who spent tens of thousands of dollars to make your life >>>> unsatisfying. >>> >>> I did pick oranges in Arizona. I know how wrong that must seem to you. >>> > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 14:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <489fa0bc-e746-4613-b6b3-18b033b42d2c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473851 |
On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 2:01:03 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 6:06:23 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 11:30:24 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>>> come from Montana. > >>>> > >>>> Well, it’s certainly less, but it is not zero by any stretch. And so > >>>> statements like “the lumber industry is completely shut down in the state > >>>> of Montana” or “the only wood you can find in the US all comes from Canada” > >>>> are exaggerations that don’t contribute positively to any credibility you > >>>> may want to muster. > >>>> > >>> > >>> I said that the only lumber companies in the northwest that were still > >>> going were companies like Weyerhauser that had their own trees. As for > >>> the sawmills you mention in Montana, they have something better than > >>> their own trees. They have people in state government bought off so that > >>> they can get trees from state land. Trees on federal lands are reserved > >>> for huge forest fires so that people in cities can understand that there > >>> is global warming. > >>> > >>>> You mention Delaware. Delaware is the sixth most densely populated state in > >>>> the US, partly because of its proximity to major metropolitan areas like > >>>> Washington DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York. Despite that, Montana > >>>> has cities bigger than any of the ones in Delaware. Delaware is one of > >>>> five states that do not have a single city with a population over 100,000 > >>>> as of the 2010 census, the other four being West Virginia, Vermont, Maine > >>>> and Wyoming, three of those being “Eastern states” you mentioned earlier. > >>>> Lincoln County’s population isn’t very big, partly because there are more > >>>> trees than people. > >>> > >>> The number of trees is not the issue. There are but few people because > >>> there is almost no private land. The private land that does exist is > >>> being bought up by out of state money. Your claim is that if the > >>> population increases by four thousand people in fifty years that Lincoln > >>> County, Montana, is overpopulated. > >> > >> I do think that federal and state lands are sequestered for a reason, and > >> that reason prevails more in the mountains of Montana than it does in > >> Delaware. > >> > >>> > >>> If you think it’s unfair that Delaware has a million > >>>> people and Lincoln County does not, the solution would be to cut down all > >>>> the trees. > >>> > >>> That sounds like typical city thinking, all right, except that you people > >>> do not cut trees down. In northwest Montana you burned about one million > >>> acres of trees last July. > >> > >> If all the trees have been burned down, then it seems ripe for all the > >> businesses that are like what’s hosted in Delaware, where there are not so > >> many trees keeping people from settling. Do you want trees or people in > >> Lincoln County? > >> > >>> Well, at least they went for a good cause. How else are city people > >>> going to know there is global warming? > >>> > >>> But then if you do that, I don’t know what you expect those > >>>> million people to do. I do note that the population of Lincoln County has > >>>> increased rather than decreased since you say the government removed > >>>> everyone’s livelihood. That’s unusual demographic behavior for a place with > >>>> no jobs, don’t you think? > >>>> > >>> That is correct. I do not think much about Lincoln County, Montana. As > >>> for the new people there, a lot of them are people who moved there to > >>> retire, so they do not need jobs. The people who do need jobs, the young > >>> people who are born there, move somewhere else because they are not going > >>> to be able to find work if they live in Lincoln County, Montana. > >> > >> Well, since the school enrollments have gone up in the last couple decades > >> along with the population, you’re telling me that all those retirees have > >> moved to Montana to have children. > >> > > You are once again confusing Lincoln County, Montana, with the entire state of Montana. > > No I’m not. The enrollments in Lincoln County have increased. Go look. I don't care if the enrollments in Lincoln County have increased. The lumber industry is still shut down there. I know because I have been there. > > > As you said before, most of the population of Montana lives in a few > > cities, Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, etc. The biggest city in > > Lincoln County was the county seat, Libby, with a population of a couple > > thousand when I lived there. > >>> > >>>> As for what you said about logging in Montana, what you said earlier is > >>>> that the only logging in Montana are a couple of private outfits who own > >>>> their own trees. > >>> I said that the only lumber companies still operating in the Pacific > >>> Northwest are companies with their own trees like Weyerhauser. > >>> Weyerhauser is not in Montana. They are in Washington and Oregon. The > >>> companies you mention in Montana are logging state land. You don't log > >>> state land unless you know someone in state government. > >>> > >>> But now you say the only sawmills in Montana are the two > >>>> near Helena that harvest from state land. I know for a fact there are more > >>>> sawmills than that in Montana. One of them, R-Y Timber has a mill down in > >>>> Livingston, clear down by Bozeman, and they employ 200 workers between > >>>> their two mills, and they cut a sixth of all of the structural timber that > >>>> Montana produces. But perhaps because they are not in Lincoln County, then > >>>> you have as much interest in them as you do in length contraction, and as > >>>> far as you’re concerned, they just don’t exist. > >>>> > >>> That is correct. They do me no good, and there was no possibility of getting work there. > >> > >> Perhaps you can explain to me why there was no possibility of getting work > >> at any of the mills in Montana outside of Lincoln County, given that other > >> people did not have this problem? > >> > > Other people did have the same problem. There were thousands of lumber > > industry workers out of work when I left. > > Right. Some stayed and changed their line of work. I imagine some lumber > workers became schoolteachers to handle the rise in enrollments. Some moved > to other counties where there were in fact more than two sawmills in > operation, as pointed out. Some people moved out of state to continue the > same line of work, just like gold miners did when they left California and > instead mined in Utah, Nevada, Oregon, and Canada in the late 1800s. Same > for coal miners. According to Trump, coal miners in West Virginia are going back to work. > > I gather you think it is unfair that people be asked to choose between > staying in the same location but changing occupation, or staying in the > same occupation but changing location. This is asking too much. > Who is doing the asking? The lumber industry was a necessary industry. The Democratic Party shut it down. The steel and aluminum industries were necessary industries. The Democratic Party shut them down. I think you should be honest with yourself and register as a Democratic Party voter. > > So how do two sawmills cutting trees from state land solve that problem. > > It was hard to get a job in a sawmill when the industry was allowed to > > exist. Most sawmill jobs are semi-skilled, meaning that you have to have > > some experience to get them. > > > >>>>>>> Trump was elected in 2016. I don't know if you knew about that. > >>>>>>> Supposedly, he is trying to get the lumber industry in the United States > >>>>>>> going again. Everything was shut down back around 1980, which was when I > >>>>>>> moved to Arizona. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Everything was shut down, you say. Except for 535 MMBF per year. > >>>>> > > > > Here is another mathematical error you are making. 1980 and 2018 are not > > the same year. It is those pesky equations you dislike so much again. I > > know how inconvenient they seem. > > Oh, ok, so you are living in the past, unable to get past something that > happened 38 years ago. I’ve met people like that. I felt really bad for a > friend whose wife divorced him long ago, and he still is trying to sue for > child custody when his kids are now grown. You claim that because I know more history than you do, I am living in the past. So tell me, why do you want me to go to Kansas or Montana and get a job in a sawmill? There are no sawmills in Kansas. There are very few in Montana. But you spend hours making elaborate posts about how I need to get a job in a sawmill. No, I am going to stay in Arizona and do welding. Sorry if that causes you such consternation. > > >>> Yes, it is really pitiful. > >>> > >>>>> I said everything was shut down in Lincoln County, Montana. Lincoln > >>>>> County is not the entire state of Montana. I know what a difficult > >>>>> concept this must seem to you. > >>>> > >>>> Well, for the record, you said you had to move to Arizona because there was > >>>> no logging work in Montana as a whole. Now, why someone would move to > >>>> Arizona because they can’t find work in their county would have to be > >>>> explained to me. A friend of mine lost his job at a garage in Johnson > >>>> County, Kansas, near Kansas City. So he moved to Eudora in Douglas County > >>>> and works at a garage in Lawrence. > >>>> > >>> As I understand it, you are either saying that I should have gone to > >>> Kansas and found work in a sawmill or gone to Livingston, Montana, and > >>> found work in a sawmill. The effort would have been just about as > >>> successful either place. There are no sawmills in Kansas, and with > >>> thousands of unemployed people from the lumber industry in Montana, of > >>> course, 400 jobs already filled in Livingston, Montana, are going to make > >>> a great difference to the ones who do not have jobs. Why can't poor > >>> uneducated people in Montana think as clearly as people who believe in > >>> the length contraction? > >> > >> I do think you had the obvious choice that a lot of people did when the > >> auto parts industry collapsed in Ohio or when the gold-mining industry > >> collapsed in California or when coal-mining collapsed in West Virginia. You > >> could either not move and find different kinds of work to do; or you can > >> stay in the same line of work and move to a location where that industry is > >> still active. I believe also that there are a number of whiners who say > >> that neither of these options is really acceptable and that somebody should > >> be blamed. > >> > > Neither of those two options is really acceptable and Democrats should be blamed. > > Well there you have it, and I’m sorry you feel your entitlement to a job in > your home town was dashed to pieces. > No, you aren't. You are happy to see what you call the progressive agenda taking place. > > They were the ones who shut down the lumber industry. Anyway, Trump is > > saying that he is going to get the auto parts industry and the coal > > miners back to work. I know that Obama said that those industries were > > gone forever, and that everyone was going to have to make solar panels > > and semi-conductors from now on, but Trump says he is going to get > > American industries back in business. > > Yeah how’s he doing on that front? Any huge improvements in hiring for coal > mining? I think he said he was going to lower deficits and get Mexico to > pay for a wall along the southern border of Arizona. So far, it appears > he’s borrowing money and increasing the deficit to pour into a wall that > the border patrol doesn’t think will help anything. Well, we will know when the mid-term elections take place. It looks like West Virginia is going to go for Republicans in a big way. Trump claims it is because coal mines are going back into production. The wall is a waste of time and money. When it is done there will be thousands of miles of wall that Mexicans will be tunneling under. I think the best option would be to give them back California. > >>>> But I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying that if the lumber > >>>> industry in Montana is not as big as it used to be, then it’s been > >>>> completely shut down as far as you’re concerned. And you’re saying that if > >>>> you can’t work in Lincoln County the way you wanted to, then you’re just > >>>> not going to do logging at all, anywhere. Instead you’ll just pick oranges > >>>> and collect government payouts in some faraway state and blame global > >>>> elitists who spent tens of thousands of dollars to make your life > >>>> unsatisfying. > >>> > >>> I did pick oranges in Arizona. I know how wrong that must seem to you. > >>>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 28 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 26 27 [28] 29 30 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web