Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #607283 > unrolled thread
| Started by | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-11-30 18:03 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-12-01 16:29 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 167 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-30 18:03 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-11-30 16:03 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-11-30 20:39 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-11-30 19:48 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-11-30 20:49 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 16:28 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 14:18 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-12-01 14:40 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-01 17:03 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-01 04:00 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-11-30 23:49 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 10:49 -0600
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 16:34 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-12-02 00:21 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-02 08:37 -0600
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-12-07 03:32 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 09:00 -0600
ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 07:50 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-01 19:02 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 11:22 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-01 22:43 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 20:18 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-02 03:35 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 11:35 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 11:48 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 12:40 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 12:53 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 16:43 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-01 22:45 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 16:41 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 13:59 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 19:47 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 14:24 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 20:13 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 18:06 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-02 18:04 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-02 23:34 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-02 19:21 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-03 01:18 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 18:03 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-04 00:09 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 19:25 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-04 03:32 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-05 18:30 -0500
Einstein, and many others, say "God" is (mother) nature. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-02 20:00 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-03 04:19 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 18:13 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-03 18:09 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 19:12 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 22:34 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 19:54 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-04 04:12 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-04 10:43 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-04 11:34 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-04 14:30 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-05 18:38 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-05 18:39 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 22:20 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 20:19 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-04 04:04 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-05 18:37 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-06 19:58 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 18:05 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-08 12:17 -0800
notation, rotation, fundation (donation\thankyou noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 21:58 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 07:00 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 18:11 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 16:00 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 19:51 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 19:54 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 17:35 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 06:27 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 07:45 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 08:17 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 08:20 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-08 08:39 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 18:23 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 17:04 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 18:52 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 06:29 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:28 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 11:46 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 18:04 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 18:02 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:02 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-12 17:52 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:19 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:36 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:23 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-12 23:52 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 10:27 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-13 19:57 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 14:24 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:45 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:51 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 12:10 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 20:55 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 13:23 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 22:07 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 14:48 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 23:11 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 16:10 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 20:26 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 01:42 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-16 17:47 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-16 23:45 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 20:00 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 01:32 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 19:53 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 01:35 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-16 17:43 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-16 23:47 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-16 20:22 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-17 01:38 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 18:06 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 23:27 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:41 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 01:00 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 18:28 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 00:04 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 20:21 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 01:43 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-16 17:48 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-16 23:47 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:38 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:02 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-12 17:55 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-12 23:50 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:39 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 00:52 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 17:19 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-14 23:14 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-14 20:10 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-15 01:40 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-16 17:45 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-16 23:40 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 20:22 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:02 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:13 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:34 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:13 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-13 19:35 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:13 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-10 02:20 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC b "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-09 21:22 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 18:12 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-09 17:57 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 16:01 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 19:55 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 16:01 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-07 19:56 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-02 03:38 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-01 22:50 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 20:21 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-01 18:06 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-02 18:06 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-02 17:02 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-02 20:32 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-02 18:07 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 18:07 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 15:47 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 19:41 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 18:28 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-03 22:28 -0500
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-03 20:03 -0800
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-12-02 03:46 +0000
Re: ODD, CHIMP, and HVAC … RELIGIOUS FUNDIES benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-01 16:29 -0500
Page 7 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Next page →
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 20:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5851f033$0$18141$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #609071 |
On 12/14/2016 7:04 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/13/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 12/12/2016 6:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>> I on the other hand can point to >>>>>> opinions of five or so government agencies (some of which were highly >>>>>> skeptical) who ALL agreed that Something significant was observed in the >>>>>> remote viewing experiments. You've got only your opinion and I have the >>>>>> authority of our government agencies. Which of us is the most credible. >>>>>> I know, I know, it's YOU because you have superpowers and the government >>>>>> agencies don't. Got it. >>>>>> ------------- >>>>>> >>>>>> OK I'll call your bluff. Post your cites. And I don't want some link >>>>>> to a kook web site or anything less than the official opinion of 5 or >>>>>> so government agencies. >>>>> >>>>> Or accredited universities. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Chimp never heard of Stanford. Just one of them thar community colleges >>>> like you and HVAC attended. Personally I got a reject letter from >>>> Stanford which shows how high their standards are. >>> >>> Are you babbling about those discredited SRI studies? >>> >>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing#Footnotes for the >>> critiques that tear the SRI studies to shreads. >> >> Oh yeah! Wikipedia! WIN! Noting like censored "peer reviewed" Wiki to >> make your case. > > Note very carefully the "#Footnotes" at the end of the URL. > > This means I am pointing to the outside, independant references, NOT > the wiki article itslelf, kook. > >> You are such a scientist. > > BJ the great scientist can not understand what a list of references is. > >> Maybe you need to go look up >> the five government reports I listed and quoted. perhaps you need to >> read the papers on the positive remote viewing results in Nature and >> IEEE. Maybe you need to grow a brain. > > If you take time from your drooling screed and diatribes and read the > REFERENCES I provided you, you will find what others have to say about > those "five government reports" kook, i.e. they were all nonsense. Sure Chimp, you are far smarter than the U.S.Army, CIA, Congress, and the office of technology assessment. You da man, bro!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-15 01:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q399id-v5f.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #609088 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/14/2016 7:04 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/13/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>> I on the other hand can point to >>>>>>> opinions of five or so government agencies (some of which were highly >>>>>>> skeptical) who ALL agreed that Something significant was observed in the >>>>>>> remote viewing experiments. You've got only your opinion and I have the >>>>>>> authority of our government agencies. Which of us is the most credible. >>>>>>> I know, I know, it's YOU because you have superpowers and the government >>>>>>> agencies don't. Got it. >>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK I'll call your bluff. Post your cites. And I don't want some link >>>>>>> to a kook web site or anything less than the official opinion of 5 or >>>>>>> so government agencies. >>>>>> >>>>>> Or accredited universities. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Chimp never heard of Stanford. Just one of them thar community colleges >>>>> like you and HVAC attended. Personally I got a reject letter from >>>>> Stanford which shows how high their standards are. >>>> >>>> Are you babbling about those discredited SRI studies? >>>> >>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing#Footnotes for the >>>> critiques that tear the SRI studies to shreads. >>> >>> Oh yeah! Wikipedia! WIN! Noting like censored "peer reviewed" Wiki to >>> make your case. >> >> Note very carefully the "#Footnotes" at the end of the URL. >> >> This means I am pointing to the outside, independant references, NOT >> the wiki article itslelf, kook. >> >>> You are such a scientist. >> >> BJ the great scientist can not understand what a list of references is. >> >>> Maybe you need to go look up >>> the five government reports I listed and quoted. perhaps you need to >>> read the papers on the positive remote viewing results in Nature and >>> IEEE. Maybe you need to grow a brain. >> >> If you take time from your drooling screed and diatribes and read the >> REFERENCES I provided you, you will find what others have to say about >> those "five government reports" kook, i.e. they were all nonsense. > > Sure Chimp, you are far smarter than the U.S.Army, CIA, Congress, and > the office of technology assessment. You da man, bro! Still haven't figured out what a list of references is, have you kook? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-16 17:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <58546f3c$0$43086$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #609098 |
On 12/14/2016 8:43 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/14/2016 7:04 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 12/13/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>>> I on the other hand can point to >>>>>>>> opinions of five or so government agencies (some of which were highly >>>>>>>> skeptical) who ALL agreed that Something significant was observed in the >>>>>>>> remote viewing experiments. You've got only your opinion and I have the >>>>>>>> authority of our government agencies. Which of us is the most credible. >>>>>>>> I know, I know, it's YOU because you have superpowers and the government >>>>>>>> agencies don't. Got it. >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK I'll call your bluff. Post your cites. And I don't want some link >>>>>>>> to a kook web site or anything less than the official opinion of 5 or >>>>>>>> so government agencies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or accredited universities. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Chimp never heard of Stanford. Just one of them thar community colleges >>>>>> like you and HVAC attended. Personally I got a reject letter from >>>>>> Stanford which shows how high their standards are. >>>>> >>>>> Are you babbling about those discredited SRI studies? >>>>> >>>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing#Footnotes for the >>>>> critiques that tear the SRI studies to shreads. >>>> >>>> Oh yeah! Wikipedia! WIN! Noting like censored "peer reviewed" Wiki to >>>> make your case. >>> >>> Note very carefully the "#Footnotes" at the end of the URL. >>> >>> This means I am pointing to the outside, independant references, NOT >>> the wiki article itslelf, kook. >>> >>>> You are such a scientist. >>> >>> BJ the great scientist can not understand what a list of references is. >>> >>>> Maybe you need to go look up >>>> the five government reports I listed and quoted. perhaps you need to >>>> read the papers on the positive remote viewing results in Nature and >>>> IEEE. Maybe you need to grow a brain. >>> >>> If you take time from your drooling screed and diatribes and read the >>> REFERENCES I provided you, you will find what others have to say about >>> those "five government reports" kook, i.e. they were all nonsense. >> >> Sure Chimp, you are far smarter than the U.S.Army, CIA, Congress, and >> the office of technology assessment. You da man, bro! > > Still haven't figured out what a list of references is, have you kook? > > Perhaps you had better read a few your self.Try reading some of the current ESP debunking books and get with the program. Live has moved on without you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-16 23:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <72beid-2r2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #609294 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/14/2016 8:43 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/14/2016 7:04 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 12/13/2016 8:00 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>>>> I on the other hand can point to >>>>>>>>> opinions of five or so government agencies (some of which were highly >>>>>>>>> skeptical) who ALL agreed that Something significant was observed in the >>>>>>>>> remote viewing experiments. You've got only your opinion and I have the >>>>>>>>> authority of our government agencies. Which of us is the most credible. >>>>>>>>> I know, I know, it's YOU because you have superpowers and the government >>>>>>>>> agencies don't. Got it. >>>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK I'll call your bluff. Post your cites. And I don't want some link >>>>>>>>> to a kook web site or anything less than the official opinion of 5 or >>>>>>>>> so government agencies. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or accredited universities. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chimp never heard of Stanford. Just one of them thar community colleges >>>>>>> like you and HVAC attended. Personally I got a reject letter from >>>>>>> Stanford which shows how high their standards are. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you babbling about those discredited SRI studies? >>>>>> >>>>>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing#Footnotes for the >>>>>> critiques that tear the SRI studies to shreads. >>>>> >>>>> Oh yeah! Wikipedia! WIN! Noting like censored "peer reviewed" Wiki to >>>>> make your case. >>>> >>>> Note very carefully the "#Footnotes" at the end of the URL. >>>> >>>> This means I am pointing to the outside, independant references, NOT >>>> the wiki article itslelf, kook. >>>> >>>>> You are such a scientist. >>>> >>>> BJ the great scientist can not understand what a list of references is. >>>> >>>>> Maybe you need to go look up >>>>> the five government reports I listed and quoted. perhaps you need to >>>>> read the papers on the positive remote viewing results in Nature and >>>>> IEEE. Maybe you need to grow a brain. >>>> >>>> If you take time from your drooling screed and diatribes and read the >>>> REFERENCES I provided you, you will find what others have to say about >>>> those "five government reports" kook, i.e. they were all nonsense. >>> >>> Sure Chimp, you are far smarter than the U.S.Army, CIA, Congress, and >>> the office of technology assessment. You da man, bro! >> >> Still haven't figured out what a list of references is, have you kook? >> >> > Perhaps you had better read a few your self.Try reading some of the > current ESP debunking books and get with the program. Live has moved on > without you. Got anything later than 2015 kook? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 19:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <585094a0$0$34662$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #608808 |
On 12/12/2016 6:23 PM, HVAC wrote: > BJ quacked > I on the other hand can point to > opinions of five or so government agencies (some of which were highly > skeptical) who ALL agreed that Something significant was observed in the > remote viewing experiments. You've got only your opinion and I have the > authority of our government agencies. Which of us is the most credible. > I know, I know, it's YOU because you have superpowers and the government > agencies don't. Got it. > ------------- > > OK I'll call your bluff. Post your cites. And I don't want some link to a kook web site or anything less than the official opinion of 5 or so government agencies. > > You have nothing. You are a liar Oh sure, now you call my "bluff" when I don't have them here. Well, just wait, hardblow, I'll have them next time! And you can kiss my ass at Broad and High st. and give me 20 minutes to draw a crowd. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-10 18:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <fc7ca9e6-0b58-4bd3-8d0b-cc2e99dd3401@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608541 |
BJ quacked We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? ----------- I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 17:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <584f2afd$0$7260$c3e8da3$66d3cc2f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #608588 |
On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: > BJ quacked > We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just > believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it > and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn > your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? > ----------- > > I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. > > Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. > > Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? > Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. I guess that makes you unreasonable. The fact that you know no science is not proof that science does not exist. You understand that even a tiny bit?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 23:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <snp3id-eiq.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #608802 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >> BJ quacked >> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >> ----------- >> >> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >> >> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >> >> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >> > Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands > of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the > existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Utter kook nonsense. <snip ad hominems and screed> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 19:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <585094c1$0$34662$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #608817 |
On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>> BJ quacked >>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>> ----------- >>> >>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>> >>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>> >>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>> >> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. > > Utter kook nonsense. > > <snip ad hominems and screed> > > Example of Chimp "science".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 00:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2oh6id-nb6.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #608935 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>> BJ quacked >>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>> ----------- >>>> >>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>> >>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>> >>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>> >>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >> >> Utter kook nonsense. >> >> <snip ad hominems and screed> >> >> > Example of Chimp "science". Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive results that has made it through peer review. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 17:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5851c584$0$2254$b1db1813$7968482@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #608941 |
On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>> BJ quacked >>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>> ----------- >>>>> >>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>> >>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>> >>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>> >>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>> >>> Utter kook nonsense. >>> >>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>> >>> >> Example of Chimp "science". > > Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as > anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research > into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive > results that has made it through peer review. Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. Positive results were so well established that later government projects concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was considered established.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 23:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dc09id-jae.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #609039 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>>> ----------- >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>>> >>>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>>> >>>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>>> >>>> Utter kook nonsense. >>>> >>>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>>> >>>> >>> Example of Chimp "science". >> >> Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as >> anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research >> into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive >> results that has made it through peer review. > > Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. BJ again denies reality. > Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and > the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote > viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. Yep, and every one of them has a critique or follow on experiment showing the orginal experiment was flawed. > Positive results were so well established that later government projects > concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was > considered established. And later experiments failed to provide confirmation of the phenomena or a mechanism. Would you like a list of reference material that shows all those positive results were nonsense? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 20:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5851ed87$0$34589$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #609053 |
On 12/14/2016 6:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>>>> >>>>> Utter kook nonsense. >>>>> >>>>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Example of Chimp "science". >>> >>> Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as >>> anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research >>> into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive >>> results that has made it through peer review. >> >> Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. > > BJ again denies reality. > >> Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and >> the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote >> viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. > > Yep, and every one of them has a critique or follow on experiment showing > the orginal experiment was flawed. > >> Positive results were so well established that later government projects >> concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was >> considered established. > > And later experiments failed to provide confirmation of the phenomena > or a mechanism. > > Would you like a list of reference material that shows all those positive > results were nonsense? So there are deniers. You are a denier. Oddly what is accepted in science is not done by counting the number of papers or a democratic vote of scientists. Even staunch kookers were backed into corner by SAIC remote viewing experiments. "The SAIC experiments are well-designed...I cannot provide suitable candidates for what flaws, if any, might be present." Nevertheless he still concludes it is still somehow flawed because we all know that what was observed is "impossible", right? Right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-15 01:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vs89id-v5f.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #609081 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/14/2016 6:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>>>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>>>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>>>>> >>>>>> Utter kook nonsense. >>>>>> >>>>>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Example of Chimp "science". >>>> >>>> Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as >>>> anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research >>>> into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive >>>> results that has made it through peer review. >>> >>> Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. >> >> BJ again denies reality. >> >>> Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and >>> the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote >>> viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. >> >> Yep, and every one of them has a critique or follow on experiment showing >> the orginal experiment was flawed. >> >>> Positive results were so well established that later government projects >>> concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was >>> considered established. >> >> And later experiments failed to provide confirmation of the phenomena >> or a mechanism. >> >> Would you like a list of reference material that shows all those positive >> results were nonsense? > > So there are deniers. You are a denier. The constant cry of the kook bird. > science is not done by counting the number of papers or a democratic > vote of scientists. Even staunch kookers were backed into corner by SAIC > remote viewing experiments. Until someone that knew what they were doing analyzed the experiments in detail and attempted to reproduce the results. > "The SAIC experiments are well-designed...I cannot provide suitable > candidates for what flaws, if any, might be present." Nevertheless he > still concludes it is still somehow flawed because we all know that what > was observed is "impossible", right? Right. While more rational people have said "...experiments depart from commonly accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in many years." -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-16 17:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <58546ea0$0$43086$b1db1813$19ace300@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #609096 |
On 12/14/2016 8:40 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 12/14/2016 6:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>> On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>>>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>>>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>>>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>>>>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>>>>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Utter kook nonsense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Example of Chimp "science". >>>>> >>>>> Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as >>>>> anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research >>>>> into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive >>>>> results that has made it through peer review. >>>> >>>> Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. >>> >>> BJ again denies reality. >>> >>>> Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and >>>> the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote >>>> viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. >>> >>> Yep, and every one of them has a critique or follow on experiment showing >>> the orginal experiment was flawed. >>> >>>> Positive results were so well established that later government projects >>>> concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was >>>> considered established. >>> >>> And later experiments failed to provide confirmation of the phenomena >>> or a mechanism. >>> >>> Would you like a list of reference material that shows all those positive >>> results were nonsense? >> >> So there are deniers. You are a denier. > > The constant cry of the kook bird. > >> science is not done by counting the number of papers or a democratic >> vote of scientists. Even staunch kookers were backed into corner by SAIC >> remote viewing experiments. > > Until someone that knew what they were doing analyzed the experiments in > detail and attempted to reproduce the results. > >> "The SAIC experiments are well-designed...I cannot provide suitable >> candidates for what flaws, if any, might be present." Nevertheless he >> still concludes it is still somehow flawed because we all know that what >> was observed is "impossible", right? Right. > > While more rational people have said "...experiments depart from commonly > accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are > undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in > many years." > > Complete Drool and senile babble. Not only that the statement is totally wrong. Get up to speed on current ESP debunking and then open your ignorant yap. The studies I mentioned did not experiments you moron. They were EVALUATIONS of the work of others. No faults were EVER found with the experimental quality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-16 23:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjaeid-2r2.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #609292 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 12/14/2016 8:40 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 12/14/2016 6:14 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>> On 12/13/2016 7:52 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/12/2016 6:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 12/10/2016 9:02 PM, HVAC wrote: >>>>>>>>>> BJ quacked >>>>>>>>>> We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just >>>>>>>>>> believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it >>>>>>>>>> and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn >>>>>>>>>> your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? >>>>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hardblow, true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. Thousands >>>>>>>>> of ESP experiments have been run over more than a century and the >>>>>>>>> existence of ESP effects is proven beyond any reasonable doubt. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Utter kook nonsense. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <snip ad hominems and screed> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Example of Chimp "science". >>>>>> >>>>>> Yep, concurrence with every real scientist in the world as well as >>>>>> anyone with any common sense, i.e. in the roughly a century of research >>>>>> into paranormal phenomena there is not a single instance of postitive >>>>>> results that has made it through peer review. >>>>> >>>>> Babbling drooling Chimp proves his total ignorance again. >>>> >>>> BJ again denies reality. >>>> >>>>> Sorry dimwit, but there were a number of papers published in Nature and >>>>> the Proceedings of the IEEE giving the positive results of remote >>>>> viewing. Telling people you are smart is not the same thing as being smart. >>>> >>>> Yep, and every one of them has a critique or follow on experiment showing >>>> the orginal experiment was flawed. >>>> >>>>> Positive results were so well established that later government projects >>>>> concentrated on mechanisms rather than proof of the phenomena which was >>>>> considered established. >>>> >>>> And later experiments failed to provide confirmation of the phenomena >>>> or a mechanism. >>>> >>>> Would you like a list of reference material that shows all those positive >>>> results were nonsense? >>> >>> So there are deniers. You are a denier. >> >> The constant cry of the kook bird. >> >>> science is not done by counting the number of papers or a democratic >>> vote of scientists. Even staunch kookers were backed into corner by SAIC >>> remote viewing experiments. >> >> Until someone that knew what they were doing analyzed the experiments in >> detail and attempted to reproduce the results. >> >>> "The SAIC experiments are well-designed...I cannot provide suitable >>> candidates for what flaws, if any, might be present." Nevertheless he >>> still concludes it is still somehow flawed because we all know that what >>> was observed is "impossible", right? Right. >> >> While more rational people have said "...experiments depart from commonly >> accepted criteria for formal research in science. In fact, they are >> undoubtedly some of the poorest quality ESP experiments published in >> many years." >> >> > Complete Drool and senile babble. Not only that the statement is totally > wrong. Get up to speed on current ESP debunking and then open your > ignorant yap. The studies I mentioned did not experiments you moron. > They were EVALUATIONS of the work of others. No faults were EVER found > with the experimental quality. Kook nonsense. How many studies of the SAIC experiments that called them, and the PEAR program you seem to be quoting, utterly flawed would you like to see kook? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pnalsing@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 20:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0c3b1d6c-3a4e-4926-a75c-28369f93b430@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608802 |
On Monday, December 12, 2016 at 2:56:02 PM UTC-8, benj wrote: > ... true facts of ESP are BEYOND any reasonable dispute. These say you are wrong... http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2008/01/neuroimaging-fails-to-demonstrate-esp-is-real/ http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/esp http://www.medicaldaily.com/esp-real-new-study-shows-when-you-sense-change-without-seeing-it-thats-your-mindsight-work-267028
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-10 18:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ec530eb1-65e3-4d3b-a868-c5deceff7655@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608541 |
BJ quacked We hear you, Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it and demand scientific evidence. Got it. By the way how did you learn your "truth"? Did you use your superpowers or magic? ----------- I'll give you the truth and you'll choose to dismiss it. Whatever. Exactly the way you dismiss Santa, Tinkerbell and leprechauns, *I* dismiss gods, ghosts and esp. Please try for just one second to see what I'm saying here. I apply the same critical thinking to one as do all. You don't. You selectively apply critical thinking. Can you see my point? Even a tiny bit?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 15:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6bcb0e9b-84b8-49ef-9d7e-5dbc39c8fe2e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608541 |
BJ quacked We hear you ------------ "We"? Why do you kooks feel such a need for validation? I guess you don't want to think that you're the *only* nut in the jar. , Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it and demand scientific evidence ---------- Bwahahaha! That made me laugh out loud
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 19:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <58509396$0$34662$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #608803 |
On 12/12/2016 6:13 PM, HVAC wrote: > BJ quacked > We hear you > ------------ > > "We"? Why do you kooks feel such a need for validation? I guess you don't want to think that you're the *only* nut in the jar. > > > > , Hardblow. Your theory is that it's always better to just > believe and take your word for something rather than to think about it > and demand scientific evidence > ---------- > > Bwahahaha! That made me laugh out loud > A nervous laugh is always hardblow's response to truth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web