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

Groups > sci.physics > #610522 > unrolled thread

Re: thiS Guy

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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.

Contents

  Re: thiS Guy "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 12:44 -0800
    Re: thiS Guy "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-27 12:51 -0800
    Re: thiS Guy HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 13:21 -0800
      Re: thiS Guy benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-27 17:28 -0500
        Re: thiS Guy HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 15:11 -0800
          Re: thiS Guy benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-27 21:35 -0500
            Re: thiS Guy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-28 05:58 +0000
              Re: thiS Guy benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-29 17:22 -0500
                Re: thiS Guy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-30 01:00 +0000
                  Re: thiS Guy benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-30 17:17 -0500
                    Re: thiS Guy jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-31 00:01 +0000

#610522 — Re: thiS Guy

On Wednesday, December 7, 2016 at 10:05:29 AM UTC-8, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 6, 2016 at 1:05:54 PM UTC-8, noTthaTguY wrote:
> > that is to say that a larger number is subtracted
> > from a smaller number in strict decimal format a la Stevin,
> > I'm sure that it's just that simple ... no matter,
> > what a gagle of gOglX clownsuits ... are wearing tonight at the ball
> > 
> > > if you want to be very safe, use an implied infinitum of zeroes
> > > in a ten-adic datum
> 
> Sam left but is still popular.That tells us something.TreBert

Emals from Sam I dearly apreciate .They are very educational.Sam + Treb make me very clever  TreBert

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#610526

"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
> Emals from Sam I dearly apreciate .They are very educational.
> Sam + Treb make me very clever ... the former of which said:
>
Glazier's ex-tutor Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
"Glazier, do not post in a science newsgroup."
"Glazier, quit posting __ your Gutter Science__."
"Glazier, exit USENET. -- IOW Glazier, beat it!."
>
"Glazier, your science is far worse than the man's on the street."
"Glazier, your postings are old man's garbage."
"Glazier, your brain is entangled with a used garbage can."
>
"reber, take your 'you know it all thinking' to your grave" .
"reber, your horseshit gets old. Say hi to Allah for me.:
"reber, you don't believe in science."
>
... and Moderator General "HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com>
"Harlow Campbell" succinctly added & wrote:
>
"Bert, you are Fucked in the head.
"TreBert, you are one stupid cocksucker".
"Bert, Seriously. You are the stupidest cocksucking
moron who ever came down the Mass Pike."
"Bert, does your stupidity know no bounds?"
>
"Bert, your opinion doesn't count"
"a trained cockroach is smarter than Bert"
"Bert, you are a clueless cocksucker"....
"Bert you are senile, dazed & confused"
"Bert is a racist. (And he's stupid too)"
>
"Bert, you really are a pathetic excuse for a human
fucking being". "Bert you are an idiot."
"Bert, are the stupidest cocksucker on the planet."
"Spin THIS, Glazier, you fucking idiot." "Bert get
some spelling lessons, you feeble-minded fuck".
>
"Bert, you should be arrested"
"Bert, I will call the police and tell them that your
van seems to be a center for drug activity in the
Wal-Mart parking lot"... .... .... about which....
>
Aviation Consultant Jim Pennino jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
Glazier, you are a spamming piece of shit...
Your Cocaine usage explains a lot of your posts.
You know nothing about government nor physics.
You are drunk again. Give up and kill yourself.
 >
Astrophysicist "Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
>
GLAZIER YOU ARE A LAMEbrain PIECE OF SHIT!
Saul Levy
>
Rocket Scientist Virdy "Mahipal" <mahipal7638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
I know, you reber are an idiot. Glazier, you are babbling
desperately. Is it sympathy or pity you're grasping for?
Stop it, either way.
 >

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

#610530

reber g=emc^2
- show quoted text -
Emals from Sam I dearly apreciate .They are very educational.Sam + Treb make me very clever  TreBert 
----------

Sam quit this group because you were so retarded that he gave up. He would explain the simplest of physics principles to you over and over and over again. You're too stupid to absorb any knowledge except the utter hogwash that you make up

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

#610540

On 12/27/2016 4:21 PM, HVAC wrote:
> reber g=emc^2
> - show quoted text -
> Emals from Sam I dearly apreciate .They are very educational.Sam + Treb make me very clever  TreBert
> ----------
>
> Sam quit this group because you were so retarded that he gave up. He would explain the simplest of physics principles to you over and over and over again. You're too stupid to absorb any knowledge except the utter hogwash that you make up
>
Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you have an 
imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you do.

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

#610551

BJ quacked 
Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you have an 
imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you do. 
-----------

Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few

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

#610562

On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
> do. -----------
>
> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>

Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do 
not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible 
for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of 
course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel 
to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done 
with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so 
excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.

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

#610579

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
>> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
>> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
>> do. -----------
>>
>> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
>> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
>> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>>
> 
> Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do 
> not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible 
> for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of 
> course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel 
> to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done 
> with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so 
> excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.

Such as ghosts, ESP, remote viewing?


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#610784

On 12/28/2016 12:58 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
>>> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
>>> do. -----------
>>>
>>> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
>>> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
>>> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>>>
>>
>> Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do
>> not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible
>> for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of
>> course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel
>> to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done
>> with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so
>> excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.
>
> Such as ghosts, ESP, remote viewing?

More than a century of ESP research and peer reviewed remote viewing 
articles in Phys. Rev. and IEEE Proc. are nothing compared to your 
personal opinion with nothing to back it up. We are all so impressed 
with you and HVAC. Drooler.

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

#610818

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 12/28/2016 12:58 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>>> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
>>>> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
>>>> do. -----------
>>>>
>>>> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
>>>> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
>>>> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do
>>> not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible
>>> for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of
>>> course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel
>>> to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done
>>> with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so
>>> excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.
>
>> Such as ghosts, ESP, remote viewing?
> 
> More than a century of ESP research and peer reviewed remote viewing 
> articles in Phys. Rev. and IEEE Proc. are nothing compared to your 
> personal opinion with nothing to back it up. We are all so impressed 
> with you and HVAC. Drooler.

You have been give several references to prove this.

My personal opinion has nothing to do with it kook.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#610920

On 12/29/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 12/28/2016 12:58 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>> On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>>>> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
>>>>> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
>>>>> do. -----------
>>>>>
>>>>> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
>>>>> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
>>>>> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do
>>>> not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible
>>>> for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of
>>>> course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel
>>>> to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done
>>>> with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so
>>>> excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.
>>
>>> Such as ghosts, ESP, remote viewing?
>>
>> More than a century of ESP research and peer reviewed remote viewing
>> articles in Phys. Rev. and IEEE Proc. are nothing compared to your
>> personal opinion with nothing to back it up. We are all so impressed
>> with you and HVAC. Drooler.
>
> You have been give several references to prove this.
>
> My personal opinion has nothing to do with it kook.
>
>
Meta-analysis has shown ESP positive results to be as much as a billion 
to 1 times greater than chance. But you have your opinion and that 
trumps all science. I take it you don't believe in quantum mechanics 
either.

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

#610947

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 12/29/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 12/28/2016 12:58 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/27/2016 6:11 PM, HVAC wrote:
>>>>>> BJ quacked Gosh Hardblow, That makes Bert EXACTLY like you! Say you
>>>>>> have an imaginary friend from the future like Bert does? I'm sure you
>>>>>> do. -----------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well since you believe in time travel to the past, you have lots of
>>>>>> choices for imaginary friends. Actually you don't even need time
>>>>>> travel... You believe in ghosts. Lol just go dig up a few
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Since both you and Bert are totally ignorant of science you obviously do
>>>>> not know that the future can't cause the present. Hence it is impossible
>>>>> for Bert to have an imaginary friend who is really from the future. Of
>>>>> course you also are too ignorant to know that even if one could travel
>>>>> to the past, you can't change it because it's already happened and done
>>>>> with. You can only view it at best. You Hollywood types just get so
>>>>> excited when you start thinking about things you THINK are science.
>>>
>>>> Such as ghosts, ESP, remote viewing?
>>>
>>> More than a century of ESP research and peer reviewed remote viewing
>>> articles in Phys. Rev. and IEEE Proc. are nothing compared to your
>>> personal opinion with nothing to back it up. We are all so impressed
>>> with you and HVAC. Drooler.
>>
>> You have been give several references to prove this.
>>
>> My personal opinion has nothing to do with it kook.
>>
>>
> Meta-analysis has shown ESP positive results to be as much as a billion 
> to 1 times greater than chance. But you have your opinion and that 
> trumps all science. I take it you don't believe in quantum mechanics 
> either.

No investigation into the paranormal that has shown positive results
has every withstood critique by subsequent investigation kook.

You have been shown numreous references to prove this kook.

Science means repeatability of an experiment kook.

Opinion and belief have nothing to do with it kook.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web