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

Groups > sci.physics > #640026

Re: The Alvarez hypothesis

Path csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:57:07 -0500
Message-ID <596549B7.6BA8@ix.netcom.com> (permalink)
Date Tue, 11 Jul 2017 14:57:11 -0700
From The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To starmaker@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
MIME-Version 1.0
Newsgroups sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity, rec.arts.sf.written, alt.astronomy
Subject Re: The Alvarez hypothesis
References <59615B14.5490@ix.netcom.com> <E5WdnQIyt_bAevzEnZ2dnUU78c_NnZ2d@supernews.com> <596278DC.4A8D@ix.netcom.com> <596287FE.10C7@ix.netcom.com> <ZtKdnaK-cP0dqv7EnZ2dnUU78XPNnZ2d@supernews.com> <5964430E.67D@ix.netcom.com> <51540183-26c8-495c-8338-265992b067e9@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Antivirus Avast (VPS 170711-0, 07/10/2017), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status Clean
Lines 23
X-Usenet-Provider http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host 108.219.229.47
X-Trace sv3-AJsPUWDGKUDylOtFdiw4cXIEN0GYRsbT6lnJtNDKj+fK0Rl3sU/lohtfQNsSeMJVukuNMwTw/MbRG23!uIvQW/NhAMkQEC5WYvx6AfVdH0XK1vZFHjMVJweIMhiyVgxocHKTnI79bqbDEe1GIQQexx+uXZxh!0xcyVYsejVQ=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes 2004
Xref csiph.com sci.physics:640026 sci.physics.relativity:424551 rec.arts.sf.written:474682 alt.astronomy:292090

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

Edward Prochak wrote:
> 
> On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 11:15:59 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> []
> >
> > There is nothing "brilliant" about his idea...he is like his
> > father, they both created 'observations' that have
> > 'never been observed'.
> 
> Come back when you learn English.
> "never before observed" is very different from "never observed"
> 
> Ed

Come back when you learn to READ English


It READS: 'never been observed', NOT "never before observed"

It means "NEVER NEVER OBSERVED" at any time!


can you people believe the stupidity in these newgroups???

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

Thread

The Alvarez hypothesis  The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-08 15:22 -0700
  The Alvarez hypothesis "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-07-08 16:43 -0700
    Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-08 20:49 -0700
  Re: The Alvarez hypothesis  "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-09 09:20 +0100
    Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-09 11:41 -0700
      Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-09 12:46 -0700
        Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-10 09:15 +0100
          Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-10 20:16 -0700
            Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:35 -0700
              Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 14:57 -0700
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-12 08:25 +0100
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 06:49 -0700
      Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-10 09:08 +0100
        Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-10 20:39 -0700
          Re: The Alvarez hypothesis pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-07-10 20:45 -0700
            Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:19 -0700
              Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:59 -0700
              Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:47 -0700
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 06:31 -0700
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 07:00 -0700
            Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 07:02 -0700
            Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 07:06 -0700
              Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 08:54 -0700
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:48 -0700
          Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 17:24 -0700
            Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 23:46 -0700
              Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-12 08:32 +0100
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-12 12:11 -0700
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-13 08:35 +0100
                Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-13 09:06 -0700
      Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 06:42 -0700

csiph-web