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

Groups > sci.physics > #689563 > unrolled thread

Rocky

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-08 15:04 -0700
    Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-08 21:39 -0700
      Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-09 10:51 -0700
    Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-09 22:52 -0700
      Re: Rocky Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 23:10 -0700
      Re: Rocky benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-10 12:52 -0400
      Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-10 11:05 -0700
        Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-11 10:29 -0700
        Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-11 10:46 -0700
          Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-11 11:25 -0700
        Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-12 23:46 -0700
          Re: Rocky Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-13 02:15 -0700
            Re: Rocky Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-06-14 19:03 +1000
              Re: Rocky Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-14 02:42 -0700
          Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-13 08:55 -0700
            Re: Rocky The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-13 10:16 -0700

#689563 — Rocky

I mean, really...

there is no difference between a rock and a person.

They both are goverend by the same laws of physics...


what difference is there?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#689604

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> I mean, really...
> 
> there is no difference between a rock and a person.
> 
> They both are governed by the same laws of physics...
> 
> what difference is there?


I mean to nature itself?

For example, ...if you drop a 10 pound stone and
a 350 pound woman at the same time from a leaning building..

they both fall at the equal rate.

Natue does not see a 350 lb woman or the 10 lb stone..


They both are governed by the same laws of nature...



there is no difference between a rock and a fat woman.


what difference is there then?


No matter what you conjure up, nature will prove you wrong.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689685

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > I mean, really...
> >
> > there is no difference between a rock and a person.
> >
> > They both are governed by the same laws of physics...
> >
> > what difference is there?
> 
> I mean to nature itself?
> 
> For example, ...if you drop a 10 pound stone and
> a 350 pound woman at the same time from a leaning building..
> 
> they both fall at the equal rate.
> 
> Natue does not see a 350 lb woman or the 10 lb stone..
> 
> They both are governed by the same laws of nature...
> 
> there is no difference between a rock and a fat woman.
> 
> what difference is there then?
> 
> No matter what you conjure up, nature will prove you wrong.

Contrary to the science fiction writiers...

if an alien can build a flying saucer..

he's gonna need a screw driver to build
the flying saucer and legs to walk around it..

in other words..They are governed by the same laws of physics...

aliens from other planets are alike all over


https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5qhvgs



aliens don't have wheels for legs..
stop this stupid science fiction writing..
yous are spoiling the imagination of children
who grow up fat and work at NASA.

(have you seen NASA new announcement of life on other planets...NASA people are all fat people!)

(what else is there for them to do while they are waiting for aliens to show up?)

and i don't think girls from another planet would want to come here with the way yous treat women..and
girl cannot walk the streets at night..

Are you going to tell the aliens girls..."Put on some clothes."

They are going to ask.."Why?"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689852

rotchm wrote:
> 
> On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 6:03:56 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > I mean, really...
> >
> > there is no difference between a rock and a person.
> >
> > They both are goverend by the same laws of physics...
> >
> >
> > what difference is there?
> 
> Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.


"structure"???? 

I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...


The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...but it's
still a rock.


I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...


of course rocks come in different shapes..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689853

On Saturday, June 9, 2018 at 10:52:15 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> rotchm wrote:
> > 
> > On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 6:03:56 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > I mean, really...
> > >
> > > there is no difference between a rock and a person.
> > >
> > > They both are goverend by the same laws of physics...
> > >
> > >
> > > what difference is there?
> > 
> > Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> 
> 
> "structure"???? 
> 
> I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> 
> 
> The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...but it's
> still a rock.
> 
> 
> I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> 
> 
> of course rocks come in different shapes..



Think about it, who knows PHP, is an IT "master", has forged Steven Carroll's ID, has an obsession and is a colossal whining toddler who, when he gets a bad case of narcissistic rage/injury going, posts all kinds of ridiculous crap even when he's _not_ flooding... AND... who endeavors to attributes everything *he* is doing on "others" and has for over a decade? It was Jonas Eklundh Communication who got caught using hundreds of forgeries for years, and these are 'people' who come clearly out of the blue immediately into threads where he was being proved wrong... by Steven Carroll for years. The one skill Jonas Eklundh Communication learned fully is to work to humiliate Steven Carroll into back peddling and if that doesn't work, shout him down or completely change the assertion. 

Don't look now, but I think Jonas Eklundh Communication has a serious brocrush on Steven Carroll. 

Both Steven Carroll and Jonas Eklundh Communication had their duds and their delusions. One played it off as someone else's mistake and didn't do anything too outrageous that could not be blamed on someone else. Steven Carroll conned Jonas Eklundh Communication as much as he deserves, big deal. Why be a sniveling schmuck about it? The whole burlesque is full of unbelievable cracks and relies heavily on Jonas Eklundh Communication's 'many certificates' horseplay. 

It's a long conflict, and Jonas Eklundh Communication is simultaneously unable to stop his trolling remarks, while posting with forgeries of Steven Carroll. 

--
E-commerce Simplified
http://www.5z8.info/peepshow_z9s9ht_dogporn
http://www.5z8.info/warez_w2t4ge_girlsgonewildpart1.wmv
Jonas Eklundh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689881

On 6/10/2018 1:52 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> rotchm wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 6:03:56 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> I mean, really...
>>>
>>> there is no difference between a rock and a person.
>>>
>>> They both are goverend by the same laws of physics...
>>>
>>>
>>> what difference is there?
>>
>> Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> 
> 
> "structure"????
> 
> I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> 
> 
> The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...but it's
> still a rock.
> 
> 
> I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> 
> 
> of course rocks come in different shapes..
> 
So do people, Faker.
Take Baby Nads for example! Please!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#689893

rotchm wrote:
> 
> On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 1:52:14 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > rotchm wrote:
> 
> > > Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> >
> >
> > "structure"????
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> 
> No *you* cant. Stop lying.
> 
> > The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...
> 
> Thats what I said.
> 
> > but it's still a rock.
> 
> That is what I said.
> 
> > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> 
> Yes. But again, it depends what *you* mean by "same thing".

The same thing..the same things. 

> A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing", if you chose to define it such.

A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.



I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...


Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..


you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...they both have to many different things to be 'classfication' a planet.


In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars. So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?


I suspect...you people look at earth and you look at mars and yous don't know what you're looking at.


Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets. Even nature can tell the difference...


All your "classification" are WRONG!


If you understand the structure of an ant, and the structure of a human, then you will know

what mars and earth is. 


Untill then...you might as well call them both...planets. I don't have time for ...stupidty.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690030

rotchm wrote:
> 
> On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 2:05:41 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > rotchm wrote:
> 
> > > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing",
> > > if you chose to define it such.
> >
> > A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> 
> Define what *you* mean by "thing".


Define what *you* mean by "*you*".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690032

rotchm wrote:
> 
> On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 2:05:41 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > rotchm wrote:
> 
> > > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing",
> > > if you chose to define it such.
> >
> > A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> 
> Define what *you* mean by "thing".
> 
> > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...
> 
> Theya re made of "atoms" where 'atoms' is a thought, a belief; Or, atoms are a model. Or, they are the specific result of an operational definition, a classification; matter.
> 
> > Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..
> 
> Nope.
> 
> > you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...
> 
> the word "planet" is a classification.
> 
> > In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars.
> 
> The word 'earth' and 'mars' are classifications.
> 
> > So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?
> 
> The set of integers and the set of primes, all have integers. Yet, the sets differ. Classifications.
> 
> > Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets.
> 
> As per the usual definition of 'planet', yes they are.


As history has shown of Pluto...yous people cannot be *trusted* with "definition of 'planet'"...


YOUS DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT A PLANET IS!!!!


Show me a sample of another ...earth. 


Calling Earth a planet...is stupid.



Why are yous stupid people calling Pluto a comet now?

https://www.space.com/40687-pluto-formation-1-billion-comets.html
Pluto May Actually Be A 'Giant Comet,' New Study Suggests | HuffPost


stupid, stupid, stupid.


"a billion comets"????



stupid, stupid, stupid.



Go feed your dogs to the turtles....



stupid, stupid, stupid.



"a billion comets"????



I demand a recount!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690037

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> rotchm wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 2:05:41 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > rotchm wrote:
> >
> > > > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing",
> > > > if you chose to define it such.
> > >
> > > A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> >
> > Define what *you* mean by "thing".
> >
> > > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...
> >
> > Theya re made of "atoms" where 'atoms' is a thought, a belief; Or, atoms are a model. Or, they are the specific result of an operational definition, a classification; matter.
> >
> > > Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > > you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...
> >
> > the word "planet" is a classification.
> >
> > > In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars.
> >
> > The word 'earth' and 'mars' are classifications.
> >
> > > So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?
> >
> > The set of integers and the set of primes, all have integers. Yet, the sets differ. Classifications.
> >
> > > Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets.
> >
> > As per the usual definition of 'planet', yes they are.
> 
> As history has shown of Pluto...yous people cannot be *trusted* with "definition of 'planet'"...
> 
> YOUS DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT A PLANET IS!!!!
> 
> Show me a sample of another ...earth.
> 
> Calling Earth a planet...is stupid.
> 
> Why are yous stupid people calling Pluto a comet now?
> 
> https://www.space.com/40687-pluto-formation-1-billion-comets.html
> Pluto May Actually Be A 'Giant Comet,' New Study Suggests | HuffPost
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> "a billion comets"????
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> Go feed your dogs to the turtles....
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> "a billion comets"????
> 
> I demand a recount!



yous know that eventually Neil deGrasse Tyson will be in children schools telling them Pluto is a comet...

(fuck up kids minds...like yous who say Pluto is not a planet...your leaders fuck you up, got yous comin and goin)



Neil deGrasse Tyson is a Uncle Tom you know...he wants to win approval of White scientist.




3 year olds in skool will be thinking...."What the fuck is wrong this nigger????"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690386

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> rotchm wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 1:52:14 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > rotchm wrote:
> >
> > > > Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> > >
> > >
> > > "structure"????
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> >
> > No *you* cant. Stop lying.
> >
> > > The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...
> >
> > Thats what I said.
> >
> > > but it's still a rock.
> >
> > That is what I said.
> >
> > > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> >
> > Yes. But again, it depends what *you* mean by "same thing".
> 
> The same thing..the same things.
> 
> > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing", if you chose to define it such.
> 
> A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> 
> I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...
> 
> Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..
> 
> you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...they both have to many different things to be 'classfication' a planet.
> 
> In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars. So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?
> 
> I suspect...you people look at earth and you look at mars and yous don't know what you're looking at.
> 
> Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets. Even nature can tell the difference...
> 
> All your "classification" are WRONG!
> 
> If you understand the structure of an ant, and the structure of a human, then you will know
> 
> what mars and earth is.
> 
> Untill then...you might as well call them both...planets. I don't have time for ...stupidty.


Simple observation shows you Earth is over 70 percent covered with water...

anything else out there covered with water????

Plus Earth has what yous people call Life...

anything else out there covered with Life????

So, Why would you classify Earth a planet? stupid, stupid, stupid.


Even the bible isn't that stupid...it reads

'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'


Even God had enough sense to seperate earth from the rest of the heavens..


"...the heavens and the earth."


heavens: 'the sky, especially perceived as a vault in which the sun, moon, stars, and planets are situated.'



"and the"


Do yous understand "and the"???

"earth"

a seperate classification of the meaning of 'heavens'.


How STUPID can yous be to call the earth a ...planet?


All your "classification" are WRONG!


stupid, stupid, stupid.



"...the heavens and the earth."



This one sentence has been staring at yous for thousands of years and yous *still* don't get it..


'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690393

In article <5B20BDC9.14A@ix.netcom.com>,
 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> stupid, stupid, stupid.

I finally understood what Alien Covenant is all about. Remember Hitcherhiker's 
Guide when they meet the spaceship from the evacuated planet that sent out one 
ship with the thinkers, one ship with doers, and one ship with idiots? The ship 
of idiots was named the Covenant.

-- 
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.    @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'                                    /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone      This post         / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don!       insults Islam.  Mohammed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690573

Siri Cruise wrote on 13/06/18 19:15:
> In article <5B20BDC9.14A@ix.netcom.com>,
>   The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> 
>> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> I finally understood what Alien Covenant is all about. Remember Hitcherhiker's
> Guide when they meet the spaceship from the evacuated planet that sent out one
> ship with the thinkers, one ship with doers, and one ship with idiots? The ship
> of idiots was named the Covenant.
> 
Did I read too much into that??

As I remember it (I must re-watch the DVD series again!!), the 
Hitchhikers were told, by the idiots, that there were going to be the 
three spaceships, and that the idiots were sent off first, but had never 
been able to contact either of the other two spaceships!!

So I took that to mean that the "useful" two thirds had just spun a 
story to get rid of the "useless" third!!  And the "useful" two thirds 
were still at "Home"!!

-- 
Daniel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690578

In article <pftb0i$pk5$1@dont-email.me>,
 Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:

> Siri Cruise wrote on 13/06/18 19:15:
> > In article <5B20BDC9.14A@ix.netcom.com>,
> >   The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> > 
> > I finally understood what Alien Covenant is all about. Remember 
> > Hitcherhiker's
> > Guide when they meet the spaceship from the evacuated planet that sent out 
> > one
> > ship with the thinkers, one ship with doers, and one ship with idiots? The 
> > ship
> > of idiots was named the Covenant.
> > 
> Did I read too much into that??
> 
> As I remember it (I must re-watch the DVD series again!!), the 
> Hitchhikers were told, by the idiots, that there were going to be the 
> three spaceships, and that the idiots were sent off first, but had never 
> been able to contact either of the other two spaceships!!
> 
> So I took that to mean that the "useful" two thirds had just spun a 
> story to get rid of the "useless" third!!  And the "useful" two thirds 
> were still at "Home"!!

I can't remember which way. I still think the Covenant was manned by idiots told 
they were colonists but sent out to kill themselves by tripping into the warp 
core tripping on their unfastenned velcro shoes.

And they succeeded.

-- 
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.    @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'                                    /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone      This post         / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don!       insults Islam.  Mohammed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690425

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > rotchm wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 1:52:14 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > rotchm wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "structure"????
> > >
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > > I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> > >
> > > No *you* cant. Stop lying.
> > >
> > > > The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...
> > >
> > > Thats what I said.
> > >
> > > > but it's still a rock.
> > >
> > > That is what I said.
> > >
> > > > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> > >
> > > Yes. But again, it depends what *you* mean by "same thing".
> >
> > The same thing..the same things.
> >
> > > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing", if you chose to define it such.
> >
> > A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> >
> > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...
> >
> > Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..
> >
> > you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...they both have to many different things to be 'classfication' a planet.
> >
> > In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars. So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?
> >
> > I suspect...you people look at earth and you look at mars and yous don't know what you're looking at.
> >
> > Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets. Even nature can tell the difference...
> >
> > All your "classification" are WRONG!
> >
> > If you understand the structure of an ant, and the structure of a human, then you will know
> >
> > what mars and earth is.
> >
> > Untill then...you might as well call them both...planets. I don't have time for ...stupidty.
> 
> Simple observation shows you Earth is over 70 percent covered with water...
> 
> anything else out there covered with water????
> 
> Plus Earth has what yous people call Life...
> 
> anything else out there covered with Life????
> 
> So, Why would you classify Earth a planet? stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> Even the bible isn't that stupid...it reads
> 
> 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'
> 
> Even God had enough sense to seperate earth from the rest of the heavens..
> 
> "...the heavens and the earth."
> 
> heavens: 'the sky, especially perceived as a vault in which the sun, moon, stars, and planets are situated.'
> 
> "and the"
> 
> Do yous understand "and the"???
> 
> "earth"
> 
> a seperate classification of the meaning of 'heavens'.
> 
> How STUPID can yous be to call the earth a ...planet?
> 
> All your "classification" are WRONG!
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> "...the heavens and the earth."
> 
> This one sentence has been staring at yous for thousands of years and yous *still* don't get it..
> 
> 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'


There is a reason why it's called...earth. There is no other planet whose substance of the land contains soil, 'a layer of earth'.


It's very simple...Earth...our earth, is not a planet! 


"...the heavens and the earth."


Anybody, anybody...who makes the classification that Earth is a planet....is stupid. That means the whole entire 'scientific community'.



stupid, stupid, stupid.


There is no layer of earth on Mars...or any where else out there...



stupid, stupid, stupid.




Maybe, just maybe..now that you know earth is not a planet...you can try and figure out what 'it is' exactly.


I was watching a gangster movie...
and it was a funeral scene of a dead gangster..
the mother was grying that her son was a good boy..
and the cops were saying he was a bad boy.

How do you seperate the good people from the bad people????

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#690431

Let me give you an example of the stupidity among all of the 'scientific community'...

first for decades 'they' classify Pluto as a planet..

then the girls change their mind and classfy Pluto, not a planet..

Now, "New theory suggests Pluto may be a giant comet"

https://www.space.com/40687-pluto-formation-1-billion-comets.html

https://news.google.com/search?q=pluto%20comet&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen

you see...these pussies in the 'scientific community' have their panties in a knot.


They are running around like girls saying "I don't know, I don't know, I don't know."


How long do you think for these pussies to change the classification of our Earth into...not a planet?


A thousand years?


No, maybe a little bit longer..


stupid, stupid, stupid.



The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > rotchm wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 1:52:14 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > rotchm wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Their structure; the results. Its just a classification.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "structure"????
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > > > I can take the rock and sculpture it into a person...
> > > >
> > > > No *you* cant. Stop lying.
> > > >
> > > > > The stature of Abramham Lincoln is just a rock structured...
> > > >
> > > > Thats what I said.
> > > >
> > > > > but it's still a rock.
> > > >
> > > > That is what I said.
> > > >
> > > > > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same thing...
> > > >
> > > > Yes. But again, it depends what *you* mean by "same thing".
> > >
> > > The same thing..the same things.
> > >
> > > > A "structure" is a "thing", as in a thought is a "thing", if you chose to define it such.
> > >
> > > A structure is not a thing, it's the arrangement of things.
> > >
> > > I mean, a rock and a person/human are both made of the same things...
> > >
> > > Now, using "classifications" is a mistake..
> > >
> > > you cannot call Earth a planet and Mars a planet...they both have to many different things to be 'classfication' a planet.
> > >
> > > In other words...Earth is not a planet, ...at least not like Mars. So why call earth and mars a planet, they don't look the same to me?
> > >
> > > I suspect...you people look at earth and you look at mars and yous don't know what you're looking at.
> > >
> > > Relative to Nature as the observer...earth and mars are not planets. Even nature can tell the difference...
> > >
> > > All your "classification" are WRONG!
> > >
> > > If you understand the structure of an ant, and the structure of a human, then you will know
> > >
> > > what mars and earth is.
> > >
> > > Untill then...you might as well call them both...planets. I don't have time for ...stupidty.
> >
> > Simple observation shows you Earth is over 70 percent covered with water...
> >
> > anything else out there covered with water????
> >
> > Plus Earth has what yous people call Life...
> >
> > anything else out there covered with Life????
> >
> > So, Why would you classify Earth a planet? stupid, stupid, stupid.
> >
> > Even the bible isn't that stupid...it reads
> >
> > 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'
> >
> > Even God had enough sense to seperate earth from the rest of the heavens..
> >
> > "...the heavens and the earth."
> >
> > heavens: 'the sky, especially perceived as a vault in which the sun, moon, stars, and planets are situated.'
> >
> > "and the"
> >
> > Do yous understand "and the"???
> >
> > "earth"
> >
> > a seperate classification of the meaning of 'heavens'.
> >
> > How STUPID can yous be to call the earth a ...planet?
> >
> > All your "classification" are WRONG!
> >
> > stupid, stupid, stupid.
> >
> > "...the heavens and the earth."
> >
> > This one sentence has been staring at yous for thousands of years and yous *still* don't get it..
> >
> > 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.'
> 
> There is a reason why it's called...earth. There is no other planet whose substance of the land contains soil, 'a layer of earth'.
> 
> It's very simple...Earth...our earth, is not a planet!
> 
> "...the heavens and the earth."
> 
> Anybody, anybody...who makes the classification that Earth is a planet....is stupid. That means the whole entire 'scientific community'.
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> There is no layer of earth on Mars...or any where else out there...
> 
> stupid, stupid, stupid.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe..now that you know earth is not a planet...you can try and figure out what 'it is' exactly.
> 
> I was watching a gangster movie...
> and it was a funeral scene of a dead gangster..
> the mother was grying that her son was a good boy..
> and the cops were saying he was a bad boy.
> 
> How do you seperate the good people from the bad people????

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web