Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s physics 
Sujet : Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)
De : bertietaylor (at) *nospam* myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
Groupes : sci.physics
Date : 05. Jul 2024, 01:21:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : novaBBS
Message-ID : <498aea5717cece4e5c74e3c7ad7fd4fd@www.novabbs.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Rocksolid Light
Jim Pennino wrote:

bertietaylor wrote:
Tch tch, the cardinals that persecuted Galileo were 1000 times smarter
than Penisnino here. Penisnino has 7 year old debating skills. Can't go
beyond silly abuse.
>
I know you think you childish attempts at insult by mangling someone's
name are clever, but actually they just show your lack of maturity and
ignorance, Arindam.
The cardinals that interrogated Galileo had far more wits than those who
merely abuse Arindam.
At least they understood what Galileo was talking about and did not deny
his discovery of moons around Jupiter with his invention the telescope.
Their point was that even if moons orbited Jupiter that did not prove
the Earth moved around the Sun.
So they forced Galileo to recant as his stand was against the Holy
Bible.
If he did not recant he would be burnt to death. Galileo was no Bruno so
he survived.
Fortunately for Arindam the Einsteinians with their Church of
Relativitycannot burn him to death legally but they can and do persecute
him every way they can.
Penisnino here has no understanding of Arindam's new physics but
correctly senses that it makes Einsteinians look like something
unmentionable.
So, that miserable wretch can only abuse Arindam on behalf of all the
cowardly corrupt careerists dependent upon their pigheaded, racist and
bigoted paymasters.
Sad.
What fools these e=mcc thumping-chanting apes be! When they don't like
something they ignore it thinking it will go away. But Arindam's rail
gun experiments are there for all to see. And repeat. Then convert to
reactionless motors, horizontal drills, guns, etc.
Woof-woof
Bertietaylor (Arindam's ghostly cyberdogs and his best friends)

Date Sujet#  Auteur
1 Jul 24 * Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)69bertietaylor
1 Jul 24 `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)68Jim Pennino
2 Jul 24  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)67bertietaylor
2 Jul 24   `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)66Jim Pennino
2 Jul 24    `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)65bertietaylor
2 Jul 24     `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)64Athel Cornish-Bowden
2 Jul 24      `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)63bertietaylor
3 Jul 24       `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)62Jim Pennino
3 Jul 24        `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)61bertietaylor
3 Jul 24         +* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)18bertietaylor
3 Jul 24         i+- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
3 Jul 24         i`* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)16David Canzi
3 Jul 24         i `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)15Jim Pennino
4 Jul 24         i  +* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)12bertietaylor
4 Jul 24         i  i+* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)10bertietaylor
4 Jul 24         i  ii`* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)9Jim Pennino
4 Jul 24         i  ii `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)8bertietaylor
4 Jul 24         i  ii  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)7Jim Pennino
5 Jul 24         i  ii   `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)6bertietaylor
5 Jul 24         i  ii    `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)5Jim Pennino
6 Jul 24         i  ii     `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)4bertietaylor
6 Jul 24         i  ii      `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)3Jim Pennino
10 Jul 24         i  ii       `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2bertietaylor
10 Jul 24         i  ii        `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
4 Jul 24         i  i`- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
12 Jul 24         i  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2Volney
12 Jul 24         i   `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1bertietaylor
3 Jul 24         `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)42Jim Pennino
4 Jul 24          `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)41bertietaylor
4 Jul 24           +- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
9 Jul 24           `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)39David Canzi
9 Jul 24            `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)38Jim Pennino
9 Jul 24             `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)37David Canzi
10 Jul 24              `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)36Jim Pennino
10 Jul 24               +* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)4bertietaylor
10 Jul 24               i`* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)3Jim Pennino
10 Jul 24               i `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2bertietaylor
10 Jul 24               i  `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
10 Jul 24               `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)31David Canzi
10 Jul 24                +- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
11 Jul 24                `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)29bertietaylor
11 Jul 24                 +* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)11Jim Pennino
11 Jul 24                 i`* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)10bertietaylor
11 Jul 24                 i `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)9Jim Pennino
12 Jul 24                 i  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)8bertietaylor
12 Jul 24                 i   `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)7Jim Pennino
12 Jul 24                 i    `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)6bertietaylor
12 Jul 24                 i     `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)5Jim Pennino
13 Jul 24                 i      `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)4bertietaylor
13 Jul 24                 i       `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)3Jim Pennino
13 Jul 24                 i        `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2bertietaylor
13 Jul 24                 i         `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1Jim Pennino
12 Jul 24                 `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)17David Canzi
13 Jul 24                  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)16bertietaylor
13 Jul 24                   +* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)11Jim Pennino
13 Jul 24                   i`* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)10bertietaylor
13 Jul 24                   i `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)9Jim Pennino
14 Jul 24                   i  `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)8bertietaylor
14 Jul 24                   i   `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)7Jim Pennino
15 Jul 24                   i    `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)6bertietaylor
15 Jul 24                   i     `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)5Jim Pennino
15 Jul 24                   i      `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)4bertietaylor
15 Jul 24                   i       +- Newton's Laws of Motion as revised by Arindam1bertietaylor
15 Jul 24                   i       `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2Jim Pennino
16 Jul 24                   i        `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1bertietaylor
14 Jul 24                   `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)4David Canzi
15 Jul 24                    `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)3bertietaylor
15 Jul 24                     `* Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)2David Canzi
16 Jul 24                      `- Re: Down with e=mcc up with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)1bertietaylor

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal