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

Groups > sci.physics > #618487

Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff

Path csiph.com!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups sci.physics
Subject Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff
Date Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:07:17 +0000 (UTC)
Organization The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
Lines 20
Message-ID <o7taml$5lg$1@pcls7.std.com> (permalink)
References <o7r866$9mo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host shell01.theworld.com
X-Trace pcls7.std.com 1487023637 5808 192.74.137.71 (13 Feb 2017 22:07:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:07:17 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent nn/6.6.5
Xref csiph.com sci.physics:618487

Show key headers only | View raw

Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> writes:

>Is sci.physics now 100 % clutter ?


>        any real physics at all being posted ?

Thanks for trying to inject some actual science here, but to answer your
question, yes, sci.physics is now just a looney bin.

In the first rubber room is this tornado guy who thinks water doesn't
evaporate, then in the next cell there is the really bad programmer who
thinks there is no randomness, then there's the guy who thinks the
universe is a giant atom, next door is the guy fascinated with precessing
spinny things, then in the next cell's occupant thinks the moon makes
water, then a few rubber rooms of babblers, then the cell with the guy
obsessed with one of the babblers, a couple of believers in ghosts and ESP
and last but certainly not least, an entire ward full of those who just
know that Einstein is wrong and each has his very own theory to replace
Einstein's relativity.

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

Thread

Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-12 21:12 -0600
  Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 19:31 -0800
  Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-13 09:46 -0800
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:32 -0800
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 10:19 -0800
  Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-13 22:07 +0000
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-13 18:45 -0800
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-14 12:49 +0000
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:38 -0800
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 06:27 +0100
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 02:31 -0800
        Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-14 07:57 -0600
          Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:28 -0800
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 05:23 -0800
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-14 08:22 -0600
        Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:18 -0800
          Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Serg Io <invliad@invalid.com> - 2017-02-14 09:49 -0600
            Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 08:04 -0800
        Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:29 -0800
        Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:41 -0800
          Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 11:48 -0800
            Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 09:03 -0800
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-14 18:52 -0500
        Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 21:14 -0800
    Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 07:36 -0800
      Re: Is sci.physics now 100 % scrap ? and AM transmitter antenna stuff noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 13:26 -0800
    Michael Moroney can't/won't read me properly. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2017-02-14 18:18 -0800
      The inmates always hate their description moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-15 04:28 +0000

csiph-web