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


Groups > sci.physics > #573362 > unrolled thread

Lawyer kooks?

Started byjohn <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
First post2016-04-26 04:54 -0700
Last post2016-04-30 14:49 -0700
Articles 19 on this page of 139 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 04:54 -0700
    Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:04 -0700
    Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:16 -0700
      Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 05:31 -0700
        Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 06:05 -0700
          Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 06:11 -0700
            Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:36 -0700
              Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:52 -0700
            Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 07:38 -0700
              Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:00 -0700
              Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:07 -0500
                Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:13 -0700
                  Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:21 -0700
                    Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:28 -0700
                      Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:40 -0500
                        Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:48 -0400
                          Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 11:54 -0500
                            Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:06 -0700
                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 14:39 -0400
                                Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 12:08 -0700
                                Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 14:17 -0500
                              Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 12:13 -0700
                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:08 -0700
                            Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-26 19:42 +0000
                              Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 13:50 -0700
                                Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-26 21:31 +0000
                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:04 -0700
                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:12 -0700
                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:16 -0700
                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:23 -0700
                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 13:53 +0000
                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 07:16 -0700
                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:22 -0500
                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 14:55 +0000
                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 10:17 -0700
                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:19 -0500
                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 10:23 -0700
                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:33 -0500
                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 11:08 -0700
                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 13:35 -0500
                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:48 -0700
                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:47 -0500
                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 16:03 -0500
                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 22:20 +0000
                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:36 -0500
                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 18:36 -0400
                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:43 -0700
                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:38 -0500
                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 19:37 -0500
                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 23:16 -0400
                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 09:32 -0500
                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 16:06 -0400
                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 15:59 -0400
                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 15:48 -0500
                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 17:06 -0400
                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 17:48 -0700
                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-27 23:05 -0400
                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 06:00 -0700
                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 06:18 -0700
                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 07:42 -0700
                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 22:43 -0400
                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 06:00 -0700
                                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:55 -0400
                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 07:55 -0700
                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 13:14 -0700
                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:20 -0700
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:44 -0700
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 16:20 -0700
                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:27 -0400
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:27 -0400
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 21:40 -0700
                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:24 -0400
                                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 04:37 -0700
                                                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:21 -0400
                                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 09:57 -0700
                                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:28 -0700
                                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? "Pom Trotter" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-04-30 13:55 -0700
                                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:32 -0400
                                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-02 17:14 -0500
                                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 15:49 -0700
                                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 03:59 -0500
                                                                                            Re: A rancher hates "townies" for being too hip, too worldly. ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 04:51 -0500
                                                                                              Re: A rancher hates "townies" for being too hip, too worldly. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 08:24 -0700
                                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 08:25 -0700
                                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-04 12:51 -0700
                                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-05-04 19:25 -0500
                                                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-05-04 21:37 -0700
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 05:53 -0700
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:08 -0700
                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:43 -0700
                                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 06:57 -0700
                                                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:47 -0400
                                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:08 -0700
                                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:35 -0400
                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:43 -0400
                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:47 -0400
                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 10:32 -0500
                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:56 -0700
                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 13:38 -0500
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:24 -0400
                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:53 -0400
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 21:03 -0700
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 01:59 -0400
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:04 -0400
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 02:04 -0400
                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:14 -0400
                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-02 12:01 -0500
                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 15:17 -0400
                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 15:46 -0700
                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-28 23:26 -0400
                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 02:11 -0700
                                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:44 -0400
                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 07:07 -0700
                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 00:47 -0400
                                                                        Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 04:32 -0700
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 12:18 -0400
                                                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 09:48 -0700
                                                                              Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 13:16 -0400
                                                                                Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 10:31 -0700
                                                                                  Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-30 14:01 -0400
                                                                                    Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-03 09:19 -0700
                                                                                      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-05-03 14:26 -0400
                                                                          Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 14:13 -0700
                                            Re: Lawyer kooks? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-27 17:30 +0000
                      Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:45 -0700
                        Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:39 -0400
                          Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 06:10 -0700
                            Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 09:58 -0400
                              Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:23 -0700
                                Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-29 23:50 -0400
                    Re: Lawyer kooks? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:33 -0700
                  Re: Lawyer kooks? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 10:34 -0500
              Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:26 -0700
      Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 11:40 -0400
        Re: Lawyer kooks? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:48 -0700
          Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 12:40 -0400
      Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-26 16:29 -0700
        Re: Lawyer kooks? benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-26 21:19 -0400
          Re: Lawyer kooks? "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 14:49 -0700

Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]


#575181

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-05-03 09:19 -0700
Message-ID<0e4c6c83-01b4-4aa9-ad8b-ada5d3f9b896@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#574422
BJ quacked
You are a big man, HVAC. You should be our king! 
-------------

Not since my back surgery brought me from 6'3" to just over 6'1".

However, the size of a man's heart is measured by how much he loves.

Testify!

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


#575211

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-05-03 14:26 -0400
Message-ID<5728ed6c$0$36998$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#575181
On 05/03/2016 12:19 PM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> You are a big man, HVAC. You should be our king!
> -------------
>
> Not since my back surgery brought me from 6'3" to just over 6'1".
>
> However, the size of a man's heart is measured by how much he loves.
>
> Testify!
>
Baby Jesus doesn't care about your missing two inches, no matter from 
where it is missing!

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


#574458

From"nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-30 14:13 -0700
Message-ID<7eeafeb4-4685-45fb-93ec-832a18130016@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#574337
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 4:32:04 AM UTC-7, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> > One thing about you that is quite clear, you are an unhappy 
> > individual. I'll give you a bit of advice and you should listen and 
> > listen well... Happiness is all there is in life. You have more 
> > summers behind you than in front of you. Lose your hatred. Lose your 
> > unhappiness. Now. Before it's too late. There is no afterlife. This 
> > is it. Use my life as an example for how to be happy. If you are 
> > struggling, alk you need to do is reach out to me and I will help 
> > you. That's what I'm here for. 
> 
> You speak of yourself her Dawg. I've never told you my religion because 
> it has no place in this science group where you have come to proselytize
> yours. 
> -------------
> 
> If my religion is freedom, liberty, reason, rationality and happiness, then
> yes. I do preach my religion. Physicists and scientists in general do not
> live in isolation. All have opinions. Most are forthright about where they
> stand and what they believe in. 
> 
> YOU jump through hoops to avoid answering direct questions regarding your
> opinions. The reason you do this is obvious... You are ashamed of your own
> beliefs and opinions.
> 
> Case closed

  I must not be either a physicist or scientist then, because I only believe in two things; the laws of thermodynamics and the Cosmological Principle. Anything else I've been willing to take as a working assumption until disproved.

  I've worked very hard at not having a belief system because beliefs seem to cause all human troubles.

  So, what do you believe in?


  Mark L. Fergerson

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


#573742

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-04-27 17:30 +0000
Message-ID<nfqsvc$4ke$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#573734
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Ah!!
>So that's why SO MANY steel buildings
>come down like that!!

Well, they do spray on fireproofing/asbestos onto beams of steel framed
buildings for a reason.  Steel is known to weaken as it gets hot.  I am
sure they learned the hard way during the early days of steel framed
buildings that they had better start spraying steel beams with (back then)
asbestos fireproofing/insulation!

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


#573430

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 08:45 -0700
Message-ID<ee61156b-540e-4e20-a0aa-6b45a8ed3998@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573413
john
So, if another country flies a strike 
against the USA, is that war? 
---------------

Possibly. The piloted drone attacks of 9/11 certainly were war. For some reason you hippies want to forget that. Under UN accords countries have a right to self defense. Note that self defense does not necessarily limit offensive operations.

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


#573443

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-26 12:39 -0400
Message-ID<571f99b3$0$15680$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#573430
On 04/26/2016 11:45 AM, HVAC wrote:
> john So, if another country flies a strike against the USA, is that
> war? ---------------
>
> Possibly. The piloted drone attacks of 9/11 certainly were war. For
> some reason you hippies want to forget that. Under UN accords
> countries have a right to self defense. Note that self defense does
> not necessarily limit offensive operations.

Pilotless drones does not make it NOT an act of war. Ballistic missiles 
do not have pilots. The key to acts of war (as I'm sure HVAC will tell 
you) is whether or not the person(s) attacked "needed killing".

Of course offensive operations ARE limited by international law, 
Treaties, and human morality and ethics...none of which matter to
SS members of the "superrace" like HVAC.

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


#574139

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-29 06:10 -0700
Message-ID<9fc9dd9a-0824-4626-9c8f-0b48431f4273@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573443
BJ quacked
Of course offensive operations ARE limited by international law, 
Treaties, and human morality and ethics...none of which matter to 
SS members of the "superrace" like HVAC. 
-------------

The 'superrace' that we envision are simply a more evolved human. This has nothing to do with ethnicity. It's just the next step.
The age of superstition is ending. It's not going to go quietly tho. Those who cringe when the light of illumination is brought to bear will resist. At times violently. As stewards of the new order, we must crush these people with unflinching ruthlessness. Not just in the physical sense, but even in smaller ways like shaming them for their foolish beliefs. We must make them realize exactly how insignificant their lives are. Yet we must always be there to welcome them into the light of reason, rationality and illumination.

Thank you

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


#574149

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-29 09:58 -0400
Message-ID<5723688e$0$35206$b1db1813$79461190@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#574139
On 04/29/2016 09:10 AM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> Of course offensive operations ARE limited by international law,
> Treaties, and human morality and ethics...none of which matter to
> SS members of the "superrace" like HVAC.
> -------------
>
> The 'superrace' that we envision are simply a more evolved human. This has nothing to do with ethnicity. It's just the next step.
> The age of superstition is ending. It's not going to go quietly tho. Those who cringe when the light of illumination is brought to bear will resist. At times violently. As stewards of the new order, we must crush these people with unflinching ruthlessness. Not just in the physical sense, but even in smaller ways like shaming them for their foolish beliefs. We must make them realize exactly how insignificant their lives are. Yet we must always be there to welcome them into the light of reason, rationality and illumination.
>
> Thank you

More proof of my thesis that HVAC has no morality, ethics, or honesty. 
He only believes in animal "might makes right" of the animal world.

Those wrong ideas are on the way out. As are all the people promoting 
them. Not my choice, but still truth.

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


#574167

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-29 08:23 -0700
Message-ID<96ebd1ee-29af-4a02-ad59-4bbd4b443496@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#574149
BJ quacked
More proof of my thesis that HVAC has no morality, ethics, or honesty. 
He only believes in animal "might makes right" of the animal world. 
------------

Your fake 'morality' is based on your bible. You see this bible as the proper way to live ones life.

I don't.

I see you and your fake morality as nothing but hypocrisy. The monster god character of your bible is a murderer. He advocates child molestation and rape. He approves of slavery and treating women as cattle. And that hardly scratches the surface of the evil portrayed in your bible as a guide for our lives.

And this is what you consider 'moral'. Gtfo

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


#574289

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-29 23:50 -0400
Message-ID<57242b73$0$38389$b1db1813$2411a48f@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#574167
On 04/29/2016 11:23 AM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> More proof of my thesis that HVAC has no morality, ethics, or honesty.
> He only believes in animal "might makes right" of the animal world.
> ------------
>
> Your fake 'morality' is based on your bible. You see this bible as the proper way to live ones life.
>
> I don't.
>
> I see you and your fake morality as nothing but hypocrisy. The monster god character of your bible is a murderer. He advocates child molestation and rape. He approves of slavery and treating women as cattle. And that hardly scratches the surface of the evil portrayed in your bible as a guide for our lives.
>
> And this is what you consider 'moral'. Gtfo
>
"my" bible? You are insane. You are in total fantasyland. And you have 
just proved that what I said about you having no morality, ethics or 
honesty is completely true. You admit it! But then that's YOUR religion 
and YOUR "god", right, right. High 5 dawg?

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


#573418

FromMahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 08:33 -0700
Message-ID<5fcedec5-93cd-4901-9d97-1d21e5f7bab8@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573404
On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 11:21:17 AM UTC-4, HVAC wrote:
> john
> Weddings in Canada more important 
> than other places, Odd? 
> -------------
> 
> Muslims see women as property. As a commodity. So yes...a wedding in
> an a-rab country is not as important as it is in the civilized
> world.

Hey IdiotHVAC, in your, as you say, civilized world, both men and women are
property. Ever been married/divorced? Look who I'm asking, the AssKingHVAC!
 
> "I'll sell you my daughter for 3 goats and a chicken" ~A-rab father

You IdiotHVAC need to watch more Hollywood re-runs like 2+1/2 men.
If me math befuddles you, well... up your's AssKingHVAC.

-- Mahipal “माहिपाल, pronounced "My Pal" or "Maple" as in S(y)rup, Wood, or Loops.”
                          /\  "If the line between science fiction and
                            /   science fact doesn't drive you crazy,
 /\                         \   then you're just not tr(y)ing!"
 \           /\/\  /  \   \/                    Mahipal Virdy
 /   ==    \  /  \/\/                         The |meforce> Paradox
 \/                            http://mahipal7638.files.wordpress.com/

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


#573420

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 10:34 -0500
Message-ID<nfo1ps$vfk$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#573400
On 4/26/2016 10:13 AM, john wrote:
> Weddings in Canada more important
> than other places, Odd?
>

No. I just asked.

War sucks. Civilians are killed along with combatants. This has been 
true in every single war since the dawn of time. Using drones reduces 
the fraction of civilians killed per combatant, but it doesn't reduce it 
to zero.

World War II had between 21 and 25 million military killed, and 50 to 55 
million civilians killed.

https://vimeo.com/128373915

So what is it about drones in PARTICULAR that has you riled up?

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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


#573563

From"nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 16:26 -0700
Message-ID<5a1d1fa5-ffa0-4a16-94c0-40bc31c1161d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573385
On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 7:38:09 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> What about at weddings, HVAC?
> Okay to wipe out whole
> wedding parties with drone strikes?
> HVAC?

  Drones aren't needed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBO0d65QJmk

  Just one sad example of many.


  Mark L. Fergerson

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


#573426

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-26 11:40 -0400
Message-ID<571f8bf1$0$15559$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#573364
On 04/26/2016 08:16 AM, john wrote:
> "Facts:
>
> On various dates, the Plaintiff observed that certain aircraft discharged trails comprising of white particulate like matter ("Aerial Discharge"), and which Aerial Discharge would persist and often span across the horizon and across the length of the sky.
>
> The Aerial Discharges slowly dissipated, formed a thin, hazy film across the sky, and would obfuscate the sun's rays.
>
> The Aerial Discharges dissipate across ranges of altitudes, including lower altitudes. Thus, the Aerial Discharges dissipate in the lower altitudes which include the air that the Plaintiff, his family and the potential members of the Class breath.
>
> The Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges are comprised of minute particles that are toxic and/or are easily absorbed into the body and the environment, and are thus dangerous when absorbed into the body or the environment."
>
HVAC this guy need to be put on the 'sanction" list and killed to prove 
there are no kooky chemtrails,

Right, right.

Fist bump Dawg?

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


#573432

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 08:48 -0700
Message-ID<2b3a4e09-3bf9-428c-ad72-a38f937e39e5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573426
BJ quacked
HVAC this guy need to be put on the 'sanction" list and killed to prove 
there are no kooky chemtrails, 
---------------

Try to keep up, BJ. We're discussing drone strikes at weddings

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


#573444

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-26 12:40 -0400
Message-ID<571f99f6$0$15680$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#573432
On 04/26/2016 11:48 AM, HVAC wrote:
> BJ quacked
> HVAC this guy need to be put on the 'sanction" list and killed to prove
> there are no kooky chemtrails,
> ---------------
>
> Try to keep up, BJ. We're discussing drone strikes at weddings
>
Politics is just so fast-moving these days!

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


#573565

From"nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-26 16:29 -0700
Message-ID<37889499-6c8c-4db0-9b06-4225416ef9c9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573364
On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 5:16:07 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> "Facts:

(snip)

> The Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges are comprised of minute
> particles that are toxic and/or are easily absorbed into the body and the
> environment, and are thus dangerous when absorbed into the body or the
> environment."

  As soon as the judge asks if Plaintiff can present samples of these allegedly toxic particles the suit will be thrown out of court, if it hasn't already.


  Mark L. Fergerson

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


#573599

Frombenj <nobodyxx@gmail>
Date2016-04-26 21:19 -0400
Message-ID<572013bb$0$25258$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#573565
On 04/26/2016 07:29 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 5:16:07 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
>> "Facts:
>
> (snip)
>
>> The Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges are comprised of minute
>> particles that are toxic and/or are easily absorbed into the body and the
>> environment, and are thus dangerous when absorbed into the body or the
>> environment."
>
>    As soon as the judge asks if Plaintiff can present samples of these allegedly toxic particles the suit will be thrown out of court, if it hasn't already.
>
>
>    Mark L. Fergerson
>
And the way you know this is? Superpowers? HVAC told you? You took some 
samples yourself?

People who have taken samples (though for some reason not good one, by 
flying through a trail, but only precipitation later on the ground or 
rain) have found barium, aluminum, and other chemicals. The trails sort 
of look like vapor trails, but if one wants to get interested in science 
start by careful observation and comparing those observations to known 
quantities (like how vapor trails dissipate). Now if you want to argue 
that aluminum, boron and barium are not toxic when huffed into the 
atmosphere, you may have a better argument. But the question remains 
just what is this spraying all about?

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


#574473

From"nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-30 14:49 -0700
Message-ID<3c111cb4-3d0c-4692-acc8-0a10307be38d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#573599
On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 6:19:59 PM UTC-7, benj wrote:
> On 04/26/2016 07:29 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 5:16:07 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> >> "Facts:
> >
> > (snip)
> >
> >> The Plaintiff pleads that the Aerial Discharges are comprised of minute
> >> particles that are toxic and/or are easily absorbed into the body and the
> >> environment, and are thus dangerous when absorbed into the body or the
> >> environment."
> >
> >    As soon as the judge asks if Plaintiff can present samples of these
> > allegedly toxic particles the suit will be thrown out of court, if it
> > hasn't already.
> >
> And the way you know this is? Superpowers? HVAC told you? You took some 
> samples yourself?

  Nope.

> People who have taken samples (though for some reason not good one, by 
> flying through a trail, but only precipitation later on the ground or 
> rain) have found barium, aluminum, and other chemicals.

  That's why, right there. The rules of evidence in court are very strict just because of that. For starters, did they take control samples before the alleged precipitation?

> The trails sort of look like vapor trails,

  Contrails can present in more than one appearance depending on weather at altitude, how they were produced (engine exhaust or aerodynamic effect from the wings/fuselage of the aircraft etc.), how old they are, sun angle, and so on.

  Most chemtrail conspiracy theorists have this kind of contrail in mind:

http://www.skystef.be/images/Contrail/JAL773-2010-08-19-2010-Kampenhout.jpg

  Apparently the colors remind them of an oil film on water, and they assume some toxic additive produce the colors. Not so; it's just sunlight refracted by small ice crystals in the trail.

  There's also the "persistent contrail" myth, that contrails always dissipate rapidly and any persistent trails must contain something that makes them remain visible for a long time. I don't know where people get the idea that contrails *must* dissipate rapidly.

> but if one wants to get interested in science start by careful observation
> and comparing those observations to known quantities (like how vapor trails
> dissipate).

  When I was in the US Air Force I was trained (among other things) to recognize the different ways contrails can appear in order to determine such things as engine operating condition and weather conditions at flight altitude.

  In a given patch of sky (especially near airports) one often sees fairly sharp contrails from one airplane which flew past very recently and much fuzzier trails from planes that flew by less recently and have been dispersed by wind shear. Absent training you can even look directly at a contrail and not recognize it as one, or mistake a natural cloud formation for a contrail.

  Now I suppose you'll tell me I was trained by people involved in the coverup and that I really don't know how to identify a "real" chemtrail.

> Now if you want to argue that aluminum, boron and barium are not toxic when
> huffed into the atmosphere, you may have a better argument.

  I wouldn't argue that because it's obviously false.

> But the question remains just what is this spraying all about?

  There no "there" there.


  Mark L. Fergerson

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web