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


Groups > sci.physics > #688394 > unrolled thread

Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test

Started bymoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
First post2018-06-03 02:05 +0000
Last post2018-06-03 02:05 +0000
Articles 1 — 1 participant

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: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-03 02:05 +0000

#688394 — Re: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2018-06-03 02:05 +0000
SubjectRe: Archimedes "just not bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium flunked the physics lifetime-generation test
Message-ID<pevidq$jte$1@pcls7.std.com>
Archimedes Plutonium fails:

>Here is an example from the Internet in sci.math of Ad Hominem of a writer 
>who hates the person he is talking to, and no matter what the topic is, 
>the message is always the same-- I hate your guts.

>On Monday, May 28, 2018 at 2:00:46 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:

>> But can you tell us what is wrong with the following proof that the
>> ellipse is a conic section? After all, you say the ellipse is not a
>> conic section and what Archimedes Plutonium says is true is true, right?

<several other ad hominems by Archie snipped>

>You're the one doing the ad hominem here, Archie. And I still see you
>still haven't learned not to attack me.

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web