Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.usenet.kooks > #653826
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| References | (2 earlier) <pdvtebp34cj8aoc7p993qettssqemcicpl@4ax.com> <bb3024fe404ac7b9bb41977b1a65e278@dizum.com> <i66uebhjr3c5eeijmgeuff29e7aivph06b@4ax.com> <1ba95e3a2d3855f7316af4b90afc78da@dizum.com> <li7vebtjp9jvjijt8nahq6q3r7e060tluq@4ax.com> |
| Subject | Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason |
| Message-ID | <65ba7d4c67cab5eda408af15ce150a9e@dizum.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2016-03-21 17:19 +0100 |
| Newsgroups | alt.usenet.kooks, sci.physics |
| Organization | dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in
<news:li7vebtjp9jvjijt8nahq6q3r7e060tluq@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:
> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:
>> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Spankard), in
>>> Hi, laughingstock who thinks i need to solve for d in d/dx.
>>> What temperature is the red-body emission from your
>>> blistered ass?
>>> LOL!
>> Oh, you mean d/dx [sin(x)] = cos(x)?
> Wooohoooo! Fakey googled a derivative, and now admits i'm
> right, which means: _____ __ _____.
Which means you're desperately trying to divert attention away from
your having defended DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation
for weeks, to include your cowardly snipping out the proof that you've
proven yourself a Mathematical Moron twice in the past week. LOL
> Hint: Fakey is _____. C'mon fakey?
Drop-kicking a cowardly Mathematical Moron. LOL
> A least you're creeping up the IQ ladder, fakey, i have to
> give you credit for that. You must be up to your hawt
> wife's age by now.
>
> Do you know what 'd' means now?
It means you're desperate to divert attention away from the fact that
you proved yourself a Mathematical Moron, and you Google-rape harder
than I do. LOL
> <crickley-dickets>
> <crickley-dickets>
Liar. Do you think your cowardly snipping out that giant whomping
SPNAK! and prok'laming 'victolly' means you've actually won, you
delusional spankard? LOL
I also notice you're running just as fast from all the SPNAK!s you
took, as outlined in my .sig.
Spankard. Coward. Moron. Poltroon. Halfwit. Monobrow.
<snicker>
============================================================
Here, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard... how about you take another crack at
refuting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H backpedaling from that giant whomping
drop-kick you just received, which you screamed "KOOK!", snipped like
a coward and ran away from.
If Gerald Newton is such a "kook", Shiny Tinfoil Spankard, why is he
smarter than you? You can't even figure out vector summation, because
you're Usenet's Mathematical Moron who claims formulas are not math.
<snicker>
===============================================================
Bwahahahaaa! The Mathematical Moron sticks up for the Mathematical
Mega-Moron. And that makes them both *wrong*.
<http://www.electrician2.com/electa1/electa4htm.html>
<http://www.electrician2.com/electa1/electa3htm.htm>
=====================================================
Mathematically, we can precisely *add* the three vectors for the line
currents by converting vectors into their horizontal and vertical
components by using trigonometry. We can *add* the horizontal
components, then *add* the vertical components, then convert this to
polar coordinates to find the *sum* of the vectors. This is called
algebraic *vector* *addition*.
=====================================================
And that all goes back to you moron's inability to grok the
Superposition Principle, and thus the Additivity and Homogeneity
properties of same... mostly you... you k'lamed that superposition and
wave constructive/destructive interference were different things, and
that constructive/destructive interference worked differently for
standing waves and traveling waves... so you're especially moronic on
this topic...
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle>
"Note that when vectors or vector fields are involved, a superposition
is interpreted as a vector sum."
There's not a minus sign in an equation on that entire page. Morons.
Here, you fecking *morons*... let me demonstrate it a way you halfwits
will hopefully understand...
<http://i.imgur.com/cuw4gus.png>
Red: 100 volt, 0 degree phase
Green: 100 volt, 120 degree phase
Blue: Red + Green
See where the Red and Green lines cross? What's that voltage? Oh, it's
50 volts. What's 50 + 50, you fucking *morons*? Oh, so when you sum
two like sinewaves, you shift the resultant to exactly between the two
tributaries, with the same amplitude as the tributaries.
Hence the resultant is 180 degrees phase from the remaining third
phase, hence the sum of the three phases of 3-phase AC must always
equal zero.
Now, let's look at what you morons are doing...
<http://i.imgur.com/zdNCScp.png>
Same exact graph, but the third phase has been added in Orange to show
the Blue Line is 180 degrees phase from that Orange line, and a Purple
line has been added to reflect DildoRider's moronic sinewave
subtraction equation... now remember, we're figuring out the
superposition (the constructive and destructive interference) of the
Red and the Green lines.
In that image, at the X axis where the Purple line peaks, the Red line
has an amplitude of 87 volts. The green line has an amplitude of -87
volts.
Now, you *fucking* *morons*... what is the wave interference result
when two waves interfere that have exactly opposite amplitudes? Oh...
that's right, its ZERO. Which is also why the Blue line is at ZERO at
that point on the X axis.
Where's that 173.205 volts coming from in DildoRider's kooky sinewave
subtraction equation, you *fucking* *morons*?
But wait! It gets even better!
<http://i.imgur.com/0l0SQjy.png>
That's the same exact graph, but with DildoRider's kooky sinewave
subtraction equation as purple and black lines... the purple line has
the 0 degree phase as the first part of the equation, the black line
has the 120 degree phase as the first part of the equation.
And one can see that the result is flipped. According to DildoRider's
kooky sinewave subtraction equation, he can convert 87 volts directly
into either 173 *or* -173 volts!
Because you're both Mathematical Morons.
SPNAK!
<dances a jig on the brains of the morons because I've irrefutably
proven myself right, and proven the two *morons* are indeed huge
fucking *Mathematical* *Morons*>
Why are you *so* *stupid*, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard? LOL
And the above proves DildoRider *and* Shiny Tinfoil Spankard have been
*wrong* about every fucking thing they've been blathering.
Bwahahaaaaa! Once again your Usenet Lord and Master drop-kicks your
moronic asses across Usenet.
I'ma just add another SPNAK! here...
SPNAK!
I bet you wish you could be right just once, huh, Moron.
<snicker>
And just so you SPNAK!ards can't bleat that I didn't show the
formulas used:
100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)
100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot
\frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)
100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(240\cdot
\frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)
\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)+100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)
\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)-100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)
\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)-100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)
And I'll just drop another SPNAK! in here for added effect...
SPNAK!
You may begin backpedaling in 3... 2... 1... GO!
<snicker>
===============================================================
Your inability to understand, let alone refute, that reality stands as
your tacit admission that you are Usenet's Mathematical Moron.
Run, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard, run! Bwahahahaaaa!
SPNAK!
Why are you *so* *stupid*, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard?
I bet you wish you could be right just once, huh, Moron.
<snicker>
> What's the electronegativity of oxygen?
Aren't you the moron who k'lames that elemental oxygen has a constant
electronegativity?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronegativity>
=================================================
As it is usually calculated, electronegativity is not a property of an
atom alone, but rather a property of an atom _in_ _a_ _molecule_.[4]
The property of electronegativity of an atom in a molecule is
different from the electrode potential of the element, which depends
on the difference in free energy of the element in its standard state
and in ionic solution, and it is different from the ionization
potential of the atom, and from its electron affinity; although it is
related to these properties in a general way.
It has been found possible to formulate an electronegativity scale of
the elements by the analysis of the values of delta and delta_umlaut
given by the single-bond energies. In Table 3-6 values of delta_umlaut
are listed for the bonds between nonmetallic atoms whose energies are
given in Table 3-4. These are obtained in the same ways as those in
Table 3-3. It is seen on inspection that the values of delta_umlaut do
not satisfy an additivity relation; they cannot be represented as
differences of terms characteristic of the two atoms in a bond.
However, the square roots of the delta_umlaut values do satisfy
approximately a relation of this sort.
The method just described for formulating the electronegativity scale
cannot be used for the remaining elements in general because of a lack
of knowledge of enthalpies of formation of their compounds as gases
and of the values of single-bond energies for the elements themselves.
Except for nitrogen and oxygen, which are discussed below, the
elements in their standard states do not differ much in energy from
states involving normal single covalent bonds between the atoms.
It is the unusual stability of multiple bonds for oxygen and nitrogen,
stabilizing their normal states, that often leads to negative values
of the enthalpy of formation of substances.
By the use of Equation 3-13 the difference in electronegativity of two
elements can be calculated from the enthalpy of formation of the
compounds formed by them.
Table 3-8: The values given in the table refer to the common oxidation
states of the elements. For some elements variation of the
electronegativity with oxidation number is observed.
[4] Pauling, Linus (1960). Nature of the Chemical Bond. Cornell
University Press. pp. 88–107. ISBN 0-8014-0333-2.
=================================================
How do you oxidize *oxygen* except with fluorine to figure out its
enthalpy of formation and thus its exact electronegativity, you
fecking *moron*? *No* *one* wants to formulate FOOF (O2F2) to find out
the exact oxidation state of elemental oxygen. You know, FOOF,
Lucifer's Gas? That shit makes *ice* explode. It makes asbestos
*burn*. It reacts with gold. Hit it with a CO2 fire extinguisher, you
just make it mad.
So... your bleating about oxygen's electronegativity means you're
bleating about an approximation, Moron. Even Pauling himself admitted
that elemental electronegativity is an approximation, and thus isn't
all that accurate, which is why he only presented them with single
decimal accuracy. Moron.
Further, oxygen's affinity for itself in forming multiple bonds means
that for a lot of substances, the enthalpy of formation is negative,
thus the electronegativity is dependent upon which substance oxygen is
interacting with and whatever other factors contribute to or detract
from that interaction.
Nitrogen is the same way, nitrogen trichloride isn't unstable because
of weak N-Cl bonds, but rather because nitrogen is constantly trying
to reform into triple-bonded N2, with a negative enthalpy of formation
and thus exothermic reaction of nitrogen trichloride.
You know, Linus Pauling... the guy who developed the first accurate
electronegativity scale for molecules... you think *he* might know a
bit more about electronegativity than a moronic bleatfarting retard
like you, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard? LOL
SPNAK!
Why are you so stupid, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard?
<snicker>
============================================================
Still don't understand that answer, huh, Moron. LOL
> What's the "fourier transform of a circle"?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif>
Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
=========================================================
<http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/>
See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier
transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in
the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL
<http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf>
2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to
Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform>
"Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups,
which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as
groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier
transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT,
group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier*
*transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval
with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle
periodic functions."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function>
You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of
the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers."
Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't
it?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"Relation with complex exponentials:
The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's
Formula"
Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak
3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS
L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas.
SPNAK!
=========================================================
Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing
to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you
are.
Spankard. Moron. LOL
SPNAK!
> What's the RMS value of an RMS sinewave?
Non sequitur. How does one calculate and graph the L-L RMS if one does
not first calculate and graph the L-N RMS in a graphing calculator,
Shiny Tinfoil Brain?
SPNAK!
I bet you wish you could be right just once, huh, Moron.
<snicker>
--
Shiny Tinfoil Spankard (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
MID: <13d33d0638e0ec690b63393d0710f658@dizum.com>
MID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*).
That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms.
That superposition is the same as wave interference.
That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves.
That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things.
That RMS isn't a DC voltage.
That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L.
That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1.
The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave.
That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering.
What a positive or negative vector is.
That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero.
That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic".
That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.
That the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective
nuclear charge.
What the definition of the word "equivalent" is.
That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples.
That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the
atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842%
margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F.
That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of
a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does
*not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames.
That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes
into account molar volume.
That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error".
That water can be plasmized.
That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge.
And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================
Shiny Tinfoil Spankard the Mathematical Moron maunders and mewls:
=====================================
"All you've shown us is graphs of formulas. No equal signs, no maths
done." - Shiny Tinfoil Brain demonstrates his Mathematical Moronism.
=====================================
SPNAK!
<snicker>
Back to alt.usenet.kooks | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 16:58 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 06:45 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 20:19 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 21:10 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 08:56 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 19:11 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 03:46 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:51 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 21:50 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 05:51 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:47 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:18 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 17:19 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 16:39 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-21 12:54 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:42 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:11 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 01:30 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:46 +0100
Fakey admits to counting lines in his obsessed way. Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 10:32 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 13:05 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-23 03:33 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 08:08 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-23 04:11 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:33 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 18:50 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 11:57 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 19:04 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 16:16 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 15:03 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 19:52 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 17:47 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:57 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-23 03:03 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 07:30 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-23 03:38 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 18:28 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-23 13:50 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 10:57 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 06:57 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-24 02:20 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-24 00:23 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-24 03:25 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-24 08:06 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 19:39 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-24 17:34 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 06:21 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-25 01:35 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-25 17:55 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-25 10:03 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-25 12:14 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 18:13 +0100
CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-25 13:25 -0400
Re: CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-25 19:03 -0700
Re: CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-26 06:43 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-25 14:12 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-25 12:09 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-25 19:16 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-24 08:05 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:34 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 09:11 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:30 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:30 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:40 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:31 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 09:09 -0700
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 07:36 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:12 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 09:25 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 17:37 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:40 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 08:58 -0600
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 12:53 -0400
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 05:12 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-23 17:09 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 18:08 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 18:57 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 07:04 +0000
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:38 +0800
Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:05 +0100
csiph-web