Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.usenet.kooks > #656790
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| References | <be0fc7e6-7f12-40f5-a4ff-0d94f61bd42a@googlegroups.com> <bc5458d7ca3b9489680f5a31622d8b76@dizum.com> <47d00bdf-475a-40f7-ad47-814b0453f3d1@googlegroups.com> |
| Subject | Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O |
| Message-ID | <6807f87f4d922f66e19d076c7e82a57c@dizum.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2016-04-07 09:02 +0200 |
| 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> James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in <news:47d00bdf-475a-40f7-ad47-814b0453f3d1@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 8:45:06 PM UTC-7, > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >>> Consequently meteorology's notion that storms are caused by >>> the convective upwelling of gaseous H2O and subsequent >>> release of "latent heat" is refuted. >> No, it's not "refuted", Jim. Your saying so doesn't make it so. > Right, and so, just saying convection causes storms doesn't make it > true, right? Correct. It's the thousands upon thousands of corroborating studies over 250+ years that prove the science, James. How many studies have you done, James? *Zero*?! How many experiments have you done, James? *Zero*?! How many corroborating studies back up your blather, James? *Zero*?! Well, that says it all, doesn't it, TornadoTard McGinn? >> You've presented nothing but a demonstrably false fairy tale, the >> machinations of a badly bent mind which cannot grasp reality, and has >> thus scampered off into the brush, creating a kooky conspiracy theory >> that has been proven via more than a half-dozen different avenues to >> be utter hogwash. >> >> Meanwhile, there are several satellites operated by several agencies >> watching latent heat of condensation release from clouds, Jim. Why do >> you continue to deny reality? >> Still demonstrating your inability to grasp how water can be gaseous >> phase below its boiling point, James? It's already been fully >> explained to you, and in the process, your kooky conspiracy theory has >> been utterly demolished. >> >> You postulate the following: >> >> 1) There is a "plasma not-a-plasma" that exists in the troposphere, >> which you have admitted is merely a hypothetical construct so you can >> continue to blather on about your kooky discredited conspiracy theory. >> >> 2) This magical "plasma not-a-plasma" is plasmized by an energy source >> that is somehow magically plasmizing water in the troposphere without >> dissociating it, given that the dissociation energy and nuclear >> binding energy of water are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, and thus water >> will dissociate rather than plasmize, unless hit with an extremely >> energetic laser. >> >> 3) That your kooky energy source is somehow plasmizing only >> atmospheric water while not plasmizing or dissociating Earth-bound >> water, and is not killing off all life on the planet. Given that the >> *minimum* energy necessary to even *begin* to plasmize water would be >> equivalent to photons at a *maximum* wavelength of 103.32 nm, just >> 3.32 nm away from the x-ray range, I'm sure even you can see the >> problem inherent in your contention, James. >> >> 4) That this magical energy source exists in the troposphere. Except >> it cannot exist in the troposphere. Photons of shorter wavelength than >> ~121 nm are absorbed far above the troposphere due to their ability to >> ionize air, thus they are not present in the troposphere, where the >> overwhelming majority of all water is. >> >> 5) That warm air is heavier than cooler air... tell me, Jim... which >> direction does air flow from a flame? Oh, that's right, upward. Why? >> Because warm air is lighter and less dense than cooler air and thus >> convects upward. >> >> 6) That air with gaseous phase water in it is heavier than dry air, >> except you forget that science has long known about molar mass and >> molar volume... >> >> \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> Air temperature is a much greater determiner of air density than >> humidity. >> >> The molar mass of water is 18.02 g/mol, as calculated from the sum of >> the atomic masses of its constituent atoms. >> >> The average molar mass of air (approximately 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, >> 1% other gases) is 28.57 g/mol at STP. >> >> Thus using Avogadro's Law and the Ideal Gas Law, water in its gaseous >> phase and air have a molar volume of 22.414 L/mol at STP. IOW, a molar >> mass of air and a molar mass of water in its gaseous phase occupy the >> same volume of 22.414 liters at STP. >> >> The density of water in its gaseous phase at STP is 0.804 g/L, whereas >> the density of dry air is 1.27 g/L at STP. >> >> Therefore that 22.414 liters molar volume would weigh: >> 18.02 grams for water in its gaseous phase >> 28.57 g for dry air >> >> Therefore, water in its gaseous phase is lighter than air. Therefore >> air containing water in its gaseous phase is lighter than dry air. >> >> Therefore, drier air *must* sink through air laden with water in its >> gaseous phase, because it is less buoyant. >> >> Except that's not all, Jim. Because air becomes denser as the altitude >> decreases. >> >> At any given altitude, air of the same temperature and gaseous water >> partial pressure will have the same density. >> >> At any given altitude, air of lower temperature but similar gaseous >> water partial pressure will have higher density. >> >> At any given altitude, air of the same temperature but greater gaseous >> water partial pressure will have lower density. >> >> For air of the same temperature and gaseous water partial pressure, >> air at a higher altitude will have lower density. >> >> (1) For instance, at sea level, 20 C temperature, and 0% relative >> humidity, the air density is 1.204 kg/m^3. >> >> Keeping all other factors in (1) the same but increasing relative >> humidity to 100%, or elevation to 74 meters, or temperature to 22.4 C, >> the air density is 1.194 kg/m^3. >> >> Thus in order for the air at sea level to rise 74 meters due to >> increased buoyancy, it must have 100% more relative humidity than the >> air 74 meters above (IOW, the air at sea level must be at 100% RH, the >> air 74 meters above must be at 0% RH), given the same temperature; or >> the temperature of that sea level air must be at least 2.4 C greater >> than the air at 74 meters, given the same relative humidity. >> >> Given that temperature can change much more than 2.4 C, whereas >> relative humidity can only max out at 100%, one can see that >> temperature-induced convection is the predominant driver of weather >> systems, destroying yet another of your kooky contentions. >> >> IOW, in order for air to rise, it must overcome gravity, which >> requires energy (said energy in the form of temperature of the air >> itself decreasing air density or the latent heat of vaporization of >> monomer water in its gaseous phase replacing a certain percentage of >> higher molar weight air molecules and thus decreasing air density). >> >> It's not because of your blather that the air at a lower altitude is >> "heavier" due to "water droplets", Ko0okTard. >> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ >> >> And before you begin blathering on again about the Ideal Gas Law not >> applying to the atmosphere, let me remind you that I've done the >> calculations for the van der Waals equation, as well. It is in >> agreement with the Ideal Gas Law to a great degree of accuracy even >> with the molar volume I used. As air volume increases for the same >> relative humidity, air with gaseous phase water in it acts more and >> more like an ideal gas, Jim. Compare the Ideal Gas Law to the van der >> Waals Equation with all parameters the same except for volume, and >> increase the volume through several iterations, then plot the >> difference between the results of the Ideal Gas Law and the van der >> Waals equation... notice the converging trend? >> >> Do you think for an Earth-atmosphere-sized container, the air with >> gaseous phase water in it would be within a very small margin of error >> to an ideal gas, Jim? Sure it is. But that's something else you don't >> understand because you're a low-information uneducated oaf. >> >> 7) Your kooky contention that water polarity changes upon H bonding... >> which would also cause random changes in water's solvent properties, >> and we know water's solvent properties do not change randomly, Jim. >> You didn't know about the two spin isomers of water, which means there >> are two hybrids of water with different H bonding strengths: >> >> <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156> >> They used x-ray spectroscopy to determine photon energy from electron >> orbital shell descent. You'll note the gaseous phase water molecule's >> photon spectra peaks at a much lower photon energy than ice. This is >> due to differences in hydrogen bonding strength between the two >> phases. >> >> <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2304> >> You'll note the double peak of liquid water. >> >> Professor Anders Nilsson, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory: >> ==================================================== >> Two peaks, what does that mean? Could it be two different types of >> water molecules then, in the liquid? And if you look at it, one of the >> peaks is very close to the gas phase and the other peak is closer to >> the ice. So it looks like water contains two types of molecules. >> ==================================================== >> >> You betcha... para and ortho-form water. >> >> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ortho_para_water.html> >> ==================================================== >> Each hydrogen atom in water has a magnetic moment, which is associated >> with the proton's spin of 1/2. As is found in molecular hydrogen (H2), >> the protons (within the hydrogen atoms) in water (H2O) may possess >> parallel or antiparallel nuclear spin (see right). When the spins are >> parallel, there is a paramagnetic state called ortho-H2O with a >> magnetic moment = 1. This is the high spin (triplet) state with three >> symmetric spin states +1 , 0 , -1 (^^, ^v+^v, vv) where the three >> states have equal energy in a zero magnetic field. This spin state >> always possesses positive energy with a minimum energy level of 284.7 >> J mol-1 (23.794352 cm-1) H216O, [607c], 284.4 J mol-1 (23.773510 cm-1) >> H217O [607a] or 284.2 J mol-1 (23.754902 cm-1) H218O [607a]. >> >> When the spins are opposed there exists the nonmagnetic state called >> para-H2O with magnetic moment = 0 with just one antisymmetric spin >> state (^v-^v) and magnetic moment = 0. Some of the water molecules in >> this low spin (singlet) state will not be rotating even at room >> temperature. >> >> Para-H2O does not interact with an external magnetic field, but >> ortho-H2O does. Conversion between these isomers is symmetry forbidden >> for isolated water molecules and they act as different molecular >> species. They can change spin state on interaction with another >> particle, including other water molecules. The equilibrium ratio of >> these nuclear spin states in H2O is all para- at zero Kelvin, where >> the molecules have no rotational spin in their ground state, shifting >> to the most stable ratio [1694] of 3:1 ortho:para, in the relative >> amounts of the number of magnetic states, at less cold temperatures >> (>50 K, see left [2478]); the equilibrium taking months to establish >> itself in ice (or gas) and nearly an hour in ambient water [410]. It >> is now thought that the ratio lies far from equilibrium and much >> closer to 1:1 in liquid water due to hydrogen bond formation [2076]. >> This means that liquid H2O effectively consists of a mixture of >> non-identical molecules and the properties of pure liquid ortho-H2O or >> para-H2O are unknown. The differences in the properties of these two >> forms of water are expected to be greater in an electric field [1186], >> which may be imposed externally, from surfaces or from water >> clustering itself. Many materials preferentially adsorb para-H2O due >> to its non-rotation ground state [410, 835]. >> >> The apparent difference in energy between the two states is a >> significant 1-2 kJ mol-1, far greater than expected from spin-spin >> interactions (< μJ mol-1) [835]. It has been suggested that structural >> rearrangements may be induced by ortho-H2O : para-H2O conversion >> [1430], as it is possible that hydrogen bonds between para-H2O, >> possessing no ground state spin, are stronger and last longer than >> hydrogen bonds between ortho-H2O [1150]. It is thus possible that >> ortho-H2O and para-H2O form separate hydrogen bonded clusters [1150] >> with para-H2O being preferred in the low density tetrahedrally >> coordinated clusters and ortho-H2O being preferred in the high density >> clusters [2070], where their rotation is more easily accommodated. >> Picoliter samples of pure ortho-H2O and para-H2O may be separated in a >> strong dc electric field [2156]. >> ==================================================== >> >> The two spin isomers of water cause a different H bond strength when >> water molecules of like spin isomers engage in H bonding to form water >> clusters, Jim. Thus the weaker ortho-H2O hydrogen bond is more easily >> broken, so most of the gaseous phase water being evaporated should be >> ortho-H2O. You'll note above that ortho-H2O even in its liquid form is >> very close to the same properties as gaseous phase water under x-ray >> spectroscopy, the difference accountable by taking into consideration >> temperature and phase. >> >> Remember when I said the surface layer of water was more viscous than >> the bulk water? Yeah, that's because the ortho-H2O being evaporated >> removes heat from the water, which makes the para-H2O in the ~1.7 nm >> thick surface layer act nearly the same as ice. >> >> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/interfacial_water.html> >> ===================================================== >> Analysis of simple thermodynamics c shows the surface has considerable >> structuring, having identical density to that of bulk water at just >> under 4 °C. In addition, the surface water structuring varies less >> with temperature than the bulk. Refractive index study of the >> water-air surface reveals it to be about 1.7 nm thick at 22 °C and >> more dense than the bulk liquid (that is, it behaves like water at a >> lower temperature). >> ===================================================== >> >> As for condensation? Well, it's been found that under circumstances in >> which relative humidity is less than ~25%, a four-molecule thick layer >> of ice forms on the condensation surface... so apparently what is >> happening is that the ortho-H2O being evaporated is colliding with >> other molecules in the air, changing their spin isomer and thus giving >> off energy, becoming para-H2O, and those are the ones preferentially >> condensing, forming that four-molecule thick layer of ice. You'll note >> above that para-H2O even in its liquid form is very close to the same >> properties as solid phase water (ice) under x-ray spectroscopy, the >> difference accountable by taking into consideration temperature and >> phase. >> >> For conditions of greater than ~25% relative humidity and thus greater >> water gaseous-phase partial pressure in the air, apparently the >> condensation process is fast enough to allow even ortho-H2O >> gaseous-phase water to condense, thus the four-molecule thick layer of >> ice is melted. >> >> So you see, James, it's not because of your kooky contention that the >> water molecule's polarity changes upon hydrogen bonding, it's because >> there are two spin-isomer hybrids of the water molecule with two >> different hydrogen bonding strengths. >> >> Yet again, your kooky conspiracy theory is ripped to shreds by >> scientific fact... made especially delicious because it was done >> utilizing a link *you* provided. LOL >> >> <http://phys.org/news/2014-09-para-ortho.html> >> ============================================== >> A hydrogen nucleus (proton) can adopt two different states, comparable >> to rotation clockwise and counterclockwise. In the case of water, the >> nuclear spins of the two — indistinguishable — protons can be combined >> in four different ways: one antisymmetric and three symmetric >> wavefunctions. Water adopting the antisymmetric wavefunction is called >> para water, whereas water adopting one of the symmetric ones is called >> ortho water. Because switching from one state to the other is >> "forbidden" due to quantum-mechanical symmetry rules, the two spin >> isomers cannot interconvert without external influences such as >> collisions. >> ============================================== >> >> Were you not aware that hydrogen has two spin isomers, ortho- and >> para-, and thus water, comprised of one oxygen atom and two hydrogen >> atoms, also has two spin isomers? >> >> <https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f24e171918d462fac89b809dccaa7c3e> >> <http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2014/201434press.gif> >> >> In pure hydrogen, ortho-hydrogen is thermodynamically unstable even at >> low temperature and / or high pressure and it thus spontaneously >> converts to para-hydrogen upon molecular collision, which has >> implications for liquefied hydrogen storage, as energy is given off by >> this spin isomer conversion. >> >> In water, the oxygen atom slows the already slow conversion process to >> para-hydrogen by preserving spin state of the hydrogen atom via >> partially shielding the hydrogen atom from molecular collision which >> would cause spin isomer conversion. Why can't you answer those questions which highlight your psychosis, James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn, Jr. of Antioch, CA? -- Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions inherent in your "theory": ============================================================ Why are you known as Tardnado McGinn, the delusional moronic ignorant uneducated psychotic babbling loon, James? Why have you been legally deemed to be mentally incompetent and a lifelong ward of your parents James, Sr. and Constance, necessitating that you live with your parents because you'd be a danger to yourself if you lived independently, James? Is it your paranoid schizophrenia? Is that why your mommy has to feed you, dress you, wipe your ass and help you to not piss all over yourself? And you call yourself a scientist, James? You're nothing more than a pathetic basement-dwelling schizo-brained delusional loser. Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James. You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change, thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby *dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James. You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma" if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly destroys your theory, James. You've yet again slapped a patch on your theory, abandoning Coulomb's Law for a separate "mechanism" by which electrostatic attraction increases with increasing distance. How does your "mechanism" and electrostatic attraction in accordance with Coulomb's Law not mutually cancel, thereby dissociating all water, James? According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow, that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level. How do the polarity of the electron and the proton cancel if, as even you admit, there is a distance between them as a result of the Pauli Exclusion Principle and the repulsive van der Waals force, KookTard, and once they've cancelled, how is polarity reestablished, and how is that not dissociating the water? If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why is the boiling point of water anomalously high as compared to other H-bonded hydrides, KookTard? If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, then water's cohesion would also drop. Why does it not do that, KookTard? If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, how is water *not* splitting up into hydroxide and hydronium ions, KookTard? If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water have such a high latent heat of vaporization, a direct result of that same H bonding, KookTard? Of course, being the delusional uneducated moron that you are, you deny that water has any latent heat of vaporization... but you're *so* stupid that you didn't realize that your denial also means you deny that water has a gaseous phase, and that's just retarded. If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water not become much more dense upon fully H bonding, KookTard? How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to touch down so they always hit only cumulonimbus clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly appearing out of the clear blue sky or from other types of clouds, James? Is your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James? Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer, Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim? How does a hot air balloon work, James? No plasma, no giant sentient tornado monster in the jet stream... how does it rise, Jim? Why can't you explain that, James? Why does water freeze from the top down, even if the heat sink is *below* the container of water? That's another question your "theory not-a-theory" can't answer. Why can't you provide the explanation and mathematics to prove your claim that humid air is heavier than dry air, James? Why can't you explain or mathematically model even *one* of your delusions, James? Why can't you get your delusions through the peer-review process, James? Why can't you even get your delusion on a pre-print server, James? Why are there *no* corroborating studies backing up your delusions, James? Why are you shunned by the scientific community, James? Why is your blather on the comments sections of websites being *deleted*, dismissed as the mad barking of a loon, James? Why are you described in the reviews of the "books" you've written as "delusional", "insane", and a "conspiracy theorist", James? Why did you *fail* *out* of an elective Basic Meteorology class, in which they teach the very concepts you're blathering out your lack of education about now, James? Why do you so hate meteorologists, James? Is it because you failed out of the elective Basic Meteorology class because you've legally been deemed mentally incompetent, James? Why do you use your failing out of an elective Basic Meteorology class as the basis to claim yourself to be a "physicist not-a-physicist", James? Do you not understand that physicists are highly educated, whereas you're ignorant and uneducated? What universities did you attend, what were your majors and what was the topic of your Ph.D. thesis, James? You don't have a Ph.D? Then you're not a physicist, James. LOL If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to shreds, Jim? Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially thousands of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream, which would make air travel deadly. Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James? Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not? That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity, James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced phenomenon due to density differential, James? How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? Do you not know that water droplets *minimize* surface area, James? How are your "plasma not-a-plasma" "water droplets" *maximizing* their surface area as you claim? Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James? How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an extremely energetic laser, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your implausible claims are workable, Jim? Why are you not taking your meds, James? ============================================================ Why can't you answer those questions, Tardnado Jim?
Back to alt.usenet.kooks | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 04:34 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 05:43 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 07:07 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 16:24 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 19:17 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-03-14 21:15 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-15 05:27 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-15 00:52 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-15 16:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-15 17:43 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-16 05:34 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-16 11:37 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-16 17:09 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-16 15:12 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 05:50 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O binky feel good <waldbyfjulian@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-16 21:20 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 01:17 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 06:54 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 02:36 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 16:19 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 13:06 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-18 05:32 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 06:19 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-18 14:16 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 17:24 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 02:08 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 17:14 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 18:24 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 02:44 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 11:50 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 03:05 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:53 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:40 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:51 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 20:31 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:46 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 04:52 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:52 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:56 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:46 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 11:21 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:12 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:31 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:19 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:45 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 09:36 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 17:50 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 16:34 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 09:26 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:09 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 09:35 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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 13:02 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:17 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:01 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:09 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:46 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 15:38 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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 12:57 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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 13:22 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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 13:29 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 14:41 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 05:16 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 19:39 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 18:42 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 14:58 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-03-21 21:24 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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 17:29 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:20 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:56 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-27 22:12 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-28 01:35 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-28 18:48 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 13:23 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-28 15:57 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-28 11:42 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 11:55 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-29 06:59 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-30 02:16 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-29 21:28 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-31 03:01 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-03-30 20:31 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-31 06:27 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-30 21:46 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-31 07:07 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 00:39 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 12:51 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 01:03 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 13:05 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 11:22 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 10:55 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 13:02 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-01 08:17 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 01:04 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-31 18:16 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 11:16 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-03-31 12:35 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-29 11:45 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-30 08:02 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-18 14:11 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-18 16:14 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 06:04 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 06:38 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-18 22:48 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 17:18 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 18:09 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O binky feel good <julianfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 23:57 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 03:04 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O binky feel good <julianfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 00:05 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 03:09 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:41 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 19:23 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 21:20 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 07:14 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 19:27 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 14:47 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:56 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 21:14 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:37 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:23 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 11:25 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:39 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:20 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:46 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:34 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 04:52 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-06 07:09 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-06 17:16 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-07 09:02 +0200
csiph-web