test (& repost)
pearl
news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
> "pearl" <t...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:<b9t47b$9gl$1...@kermit.esat.net>...
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
news:3EC062D7...@whitehouse.not...
> >
> > > Don't get too chummy with "pearl",
> >
> > Wassup, boil? There's enuf chumminess to go around.
> >
> > > She believes there is a civilization of
> > > "inner earth beings" with an entry portal under Mt.
> > > Shasta in No. Calif.,
> >
> > That is true. Explain this picture:
> > http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
>
> That's easy. you loon. It's either a reflection of the sun or an
> altered photograph.
Or light emitting from a perfectly rectangular ventilation shaft
halfway up a cliff.
> Cite some scientific evidence for once and don't misinterpret it.
I'm constantly citing scientific evidence, and I don't misinterpret it.
> > > and she also believes
> >
> > Believed.
>
> What changed that belief?
Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
> The fact you would believe it in the
> first place shows your brain isn't fully functional.
No, it shows that I have an open mind.
> > > U.S. patent
> > > 1096102, issued for a mechanical globe with a light in
> > > it sometime back in the 1910s, was actually a "patent"
> > > on the discovery that the earth is hollow, with gaping
> > > holes at or near the poles.
> >
> > Explain this;
> > http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> > Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions. [x] -see image on page.
> > 'Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> > Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> > particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> > comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> > accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> > 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a
> > fountain of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
>
> What's to explain?
The above. Where is all this energized gas, thought to be from
solar wind 'because the energies were right', but blowing from
the N & S poles, coming from? What could be creating these
'fountains' of energized gas? Look at the picture, and tell us
what you see.
> There's nothing there that would lead anyone to
> believe it's evidence of a hollow earth.
You've said nothing that would lead anyone to believe that
it isn't evidence of a hollow earth. Ad hominem bluster = 0.
> You really don't understand anything, do you?
I understand that you don't really understand anything.
> > > She is a bona fide lunatic. You've been cautioned.
> >
> > There's a great deal in Heaven and Earth that you are
> > unaware of, boil. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
>
> The things you believe have nothing to do with either heaven or
> earth. You believe junk that even the most ardent followers of the
> most warped meta-physical ideas would find hysterical. You are,
> without doubt, the looniest charlatan on the planet. You have provided
> zero evidence to support your inner-earth theory and you have yet to
> comprehend what is even meant by the word "evidence".
lol. Blah, blah, blah, - change the effing record won't ya.
> > This is off-topic, and I'll not be dragged into a nasty
> > flame war about it again.
>
> You've lost every single time and you always will.
'Lost'? Thanks for confirming that this is all about point scoring for you.
> > The way you treat others only reflects on you, ball.
>
> Weak dodge.
Weak dodge, brandy. And the same can be said about you.
> In this post, you have done what you always do:
>
> 1) Cite crank websites as evidence.
You'll mis-label anything that doesn't fit in with your opinion as 'crank'.
> 2) Misinterpret an actual scientific website.
Where? Go on, give us your interpretation of it.
> 3) Make up a pitiful excuse for why you can't support your beliefs.
When?
Jonathan Ball
> "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
>
>>>That is true. Explain this picture:
>>>http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
>>
>> That's easy. you loon. It's either a reflection of the sun or an
>>altered photograph.
>
>
> Or light emitting from a perfectly rectangular ventilation shaft
> halfway up a cliff.
Nope. That's what a gullible, ignorant, anti-science
loon like you would be likely to think.
>
>
>>Cite some scientific evidence for once and don't misinterpret it.
>
>
> I'm constantly citing scientific evidence, and I don't misinterpret it.
You almost never cite scientific evidence, and on the
rare occasion when you do, you always misinterpret it.
>
>
>>>>and she also believes
>>>
>>>Believed.
>>
>> What changed that belief?
>
>
> Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
> in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
thrashing from Dreck.
In fact, you putrid cunt, you STILL haven't seen the
actual patent. All you've seen is the excerpts of it I
posted.
>
>
>> The fact you would believe it in the
>> first place shows your brain isn't fully functional.
>
>
> No, it shows that I have an open mind.
No, your stubborn denial over a period of weeks, until
someone from The Side called you an idiot, shows that
you have a worm-eaten mind.
>
>
>>>>U.S. patent
>>>>1096102, issued for a mechanical globe with a light in
>>>>it sometime back in the 1910s, was actually a "patent"
>>>>on the discovery that the earth is hollow, with gaping
>>>>holes at or near the poles.
>>>
>>>Explain this;
>>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
>>>Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions. [x] -see image on page.
>>>'Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
>>>Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
>>>particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
>>>comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
>>>accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
>>>1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a
>>>fountain of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
>>
>> What's to explain?
>
>
> The above. Where is all this energized gas, thought to be from
> solar wind 'because the energies were right', but blowing from
> the N & S poles, coming from? What could be creating these
> 'fountains' of energized gas? Look at the picture, and tell us
> what you see.
It's not originating *from* the poles, and certainly
not from beneath the earth's surface.
pearl
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
>
> >>>That is true. Explain this picture:
> >>>http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
> >>
> >> That's easy. you loon. It's either a reflection of the sun or an
> >>altered photograph.
> >
> >
> > Or light emitting from a perfectly rectangular ventilation shaft
> > halfway up a cliff.
>
> Nope.
That's certainly what it looks like. Also the description that
accompanies the picture rings genuine, and the site is in no
way connected to 'hollow earth'. In fact neither the website
owner, nor the person who took the photo' appear to even
be aware of the it.
> That's what a gullible, ignorant, anti-science
> loon like you would be likely to think.
You just don't like it.
> >>Cite some scientific evidence for once and don't misinterpret it.
> >
> > I'm constantly citing scientific evidence, and I don't misinterpret it.
>
> You almost never cite scientific evidence,
That's a bald lie.
> and on the
> rare occasion when you do, you always misinterpret it.
And another.
> >>>>and she also believes
> >>>
> >>>Believed.
> >>
> >> What changed that belief?
> >
> > Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
> > in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> > astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> > poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>
> It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
> in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
> thrashing from Dreck.
No it didn't. It took a few days of my researching patent laws,
and finally seeing the patent. You helped track that down is all.
> In fact, you STILL haven't seen the
> actual patent. All you've seen is the excerpts of it I
> posted.
No, sewer mouth, I saw what was up at the patent site.
> >> The fact you would believe it in the
> >> first place shows your brain isn't fully functional.
> >
> > No, it shows that I have an open mind.
>
> No, your stubborn denial over a period of weeks,
About the patent? A few days of my studying patent law
was not weeks of stubborn denial. That was in any case
an unimportant side issue you seized upon.
> until someone from The Side called you an idiot,
Where?
> shows that you have a worm-eaten mind.
You've been wrong, innacurate or lying on every point so far,
so what does that say about you?
> >>>>U.S. patent
> >>>>1096102, issued for a mechanical globe with a light in
> >>>>it sometime back in the 1910s, was actually a "patent"
> >>>>on the discovery that the earth is hollow, with gaping
> >>>>holes at or near the poles.
> >>>
> >>>Explain this;
> >>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> >>>Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions. [x] -see image on page.
> >>>'Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> >>>Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> >>>particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> >>>comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> >>>accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> >>>1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a
> >>>fountain of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
> >>
> >> What's to explain?
> >
> > The above. Where is all this energized gas, thought to be from
> > solar wind 'because the energies were right', but blowing from
> > the N & S poles, coming from? What could be creating these
> > 'fountains' of energized gas? Look at the picture, and tell us
> > what you see.
>
> It's not originating *from* the poles, and certainly
> not from beneath the earth's surface.
It is blowing *from* the poles. It is a fountain of gas energised
as if from a solar wind. It is 'slamming into the ionosphere'.
Where is all this energized gas coming from, boil?
Jonathan Ball
> So this didn't get through the first time? hmm.
Nothing you write gets through. You're unintelligible.
>
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>>"Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>>>That is true. Explain this picture:
>>>>>http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
>>>>
>>>> That's easy. you loon. It's either a reflection of the sun or an
>>>>altered photograph.
>>>
>>>
>>>Or light emitting from a perfectly rectangular ventilation shaft
>>>halfway up a cliff.
>>
>>Nope.
>
>
> That's certainly what it looks like.
To an untrained, ignorant twat, I suppose it might.
>
>>That's what a gullible, ignorant, anti-science
>>loon like you would be likely to think.
>
>
> You just don't like it.
What I don't like is that ignorant twats like you can
walk around loose.
>
>
>>>>Cite some scientific evidence for once and don't misinterpret it.
>>>
>>>I'm constantly citing scientific evidence, and I don't misinterpret it.
>>
>>You almost never cite scientific evidence,
>
>
> That's a bald lie.
It's the truth.
>>>>>>and she also believes
>>>>>
>>>>>Believed.
>>>>
>>>> What changed that belief?
>>>
>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>>
>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
>>thrashing from Dreck.
>
>
> No it didn't.
Yes, that's what it was.
>>>>The fact you would believe it in the
>>>> first place shows your brain isn't fully functional.
>>>
>>>No, it shows that I have an open mind.
>>
>>No, your stubborn denial over a period of weeks,
>
>
> About the patent? A few days
Weeks. It was a matter of weeks.
> of my studying patent law
Haw haw haw. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW!
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
> >
>
> >>>That is true. Explain this picture:
> >>>http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/OddPics/Shasta.html
> >>
> >> That's easy. you loon. It's either a reflection of the sun or an
> >>altered photograph.
> >
> >
> > Or light emitting from a perfectly rectangular ventilation shaft
> > halfway up a cliff.
>
> Nope. That's what a gullible, ignorant, anti-science
> loon like you would be likely to think.
>
> >
> >
> >>Cite some scientific evidence for once and don't misinterpret it.
> >
> >
> > I'm constantly citing scientific evidence, and I don't misinterpret it.
>
> You almost never cite scientific evidence, and on the
> rare occasion when you do, you always misinterpret it.
>
> >
> >
> >>>>and she also believes
> >>>
> >>>Believed.
> >>
> >> What changed that belief
> >
> > in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> > astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> > poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>
> It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
> in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
> thrashing from Dreck.
>
I was let off quite easily. As usual, and in similar style to
when I questioned lilweed on her indicated inclusion of
humans to a list of frugivores some time ago, I made the
mistake in not reading her posts correctly. I left myself
wide open for a lot of criticism and an easy attack on
both accounts, but fortunately for me I was given a free
pass when I admitted my error.
> >
> >> The fact you would believe it in the
> >> first place shows your brain isn't fully functional.
> >
> >
> > No, it shows that I have an open mind.
>
> No, your stubborn denial over a period of weeks, until
> someone from The Side called you an idiot, shows that
> you have a worm-eaten mind.
>
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>>>>>and she also believes
>>>>>
>>>>>Believed.
>>>>
>>>> What changed that belief
>>>
>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>>
>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
>>thrashing from Dreck.
>>
>
> That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
> I was let off quite easily.
What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off? You
weren't being ridiculed in that thread, you fucking
moron; the foul skanky whore ~~illweed~~ was, and she
wasn't let off at all.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC47DFB...@whitehouse.not...
> Derek wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
> >
>
> >>>>>>and she also believes
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Believed.
> >>>>
> >>>> What changed that belief
> >>>
> >>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
> >>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> >>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> >>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
> >>
> >>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
> >>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
> >>thrashing from Dreck.
> >>
> >
> > That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
> > I was let off quite easily.
>
> What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off?
I didn't read her posts correctly. What do you think
she meant by, "Why do you think i capitulated so
easily to you? " Date: 2003-02-10
I was let off and you know it.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC47DFB...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>Derek wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
>>>
>>
>>>>>>>>and she also believes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Believed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What changed that belief
>>>>>
>>>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
>>>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
>>>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
>>>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>>>>
>>>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
>>>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
>>>>thrashing from Dreck.
>>>>
>>>
>>>That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
>>>I was let off quite easily.
>>
>>What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off?
>
>
> I didn't read her posts correctly.
Bizarrely, you did. You seldom read anything
correctly, but even the blind squirrel occasionally
finds the nut.
You read them correctly: the stupid STD-befouled whore
WAS INDEED considering the patent to be on the
discovery of "hollow earth". She was wrong. You're
morally wrong and a stupid fuck to be trying to defend
her now.
pearl
news:ba1usq$okcpe$1...@ID-190488.news.dfncis.de...
> I didn't read her posts correctly. What do you think
> she meant by, "Why do you think i capitulated so
> easily to you? " Date: 2003-02-10
> I was let off and you know it.
It's all good, Derek.
Methinks mr. haw haw is (as) ever going to feel rather
uncomfortable on the issue of fountains of energized gas.
pearl
> pearl wrote:
> > So this didn't get through the first time? hmm.
>
> Nothing you write gets through. You're unintelligible.
No, you're just unintelligent, i.e. thick.
<..>
> > About the patent? A few days
>
> Weeks. It was a matter of weeks.
Let's see;
[OT] mlm's vindictive villainy backfires
04 January 2003 22:46
Lotus:
It ~should~ be easy enough to verify what patent 1096102 is.
Re: ~~weed~~ is thoroughly, incontestably vindicated, and boil is shown to be a LIAR
06 January 2003 17:36
boil-
> First of all, throughout the the text, Gardner refers
> to it as "my invention". Not "my discovery",
> ~~weed~~, but "my invention.
lotus-
If so, fair enough, but his invention is still about his
hollow earth concept.
---
We'd had tech' hitches seeing the patent, remember?
I finally managed to see it with the required plug-in,
and said to Derek-
06 January 2003 19:30
I can assure you that what boil says is right, for a change.
--end--
So we see that it was a matter of _two days_, not 'weeks'.
Once again you are shown to be a stupid, chronic liar, boil.
Well done.
---restore---
That was in any case an unimportant side issue you seized upon.
> until someone from The Side called you an idiot,
Where?
- More lies, eh boil, you stupid sack of filth.
> shows that you have a worm-eaten mind.
You've been wrong, inaccurate or lying on every point so far,
so what does that say about you?
> >>>>U.S. patent
> >>>>1096102, issued for a mechanical globe with a light in
> >>>>it sometime back in the 1910s, was actually a "patent"
> >>>>on the discovery that the earth is hollow, with gaping
> >>>>holes at or near the poles.
> >>>
> >>>Explain this;
> >>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> >>>Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions. [x] -see image on page.
> >>>'Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> >>>Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> >>>particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> >>>comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> >>>accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> >>>1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a
> >>>fountain of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
> >>
> >> What's to explain?
> >
> > The above. Where is all this energized gas, thought to be from
> > solar wind 'because the energies were right', but blowing from
> > the N & S poles, coming from? What could be creating these
> > 'fountains' of energized gas? Look at the picture, and tell us
> > what you see.
>
> It's not originating *from* the poles, and certainly
> not from beneath the earth's surface.
It is blowing *from* the poles. It is a fountain of gas energized
as if from a solar wind. It is 'slamming into the ionosphere'.
Where is all this energized gas coming from, boil?
--end restore--
WELL?
>
Jonathan Ball
>
> WELL?
There's nothing to discuss with a proven liar who talks
about "a few days of my studying patent law", when you
have never studied patent law in your life.
Derek
"pearl" <t...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:ba2fmm$qnv$1...@kermit.esat.net...
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC482EE...@whitehouse.not...
> Derek wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC47DFB...@whitehouse.not...
> >>Derek wrote:
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
> >>
> >>>>>>>>and she also believes
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Believed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What changed that belief
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
> >>>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> >>>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> >>>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
> >>>>
> >>>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
> >>>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
> >>>>thrashing from Dreck.
> >>>
> >>>That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
> >>>I was let off quite easily.
> >>
> >>What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off?
> >
> > I didn't read her posts correctly.
>
> Bizarrely, you did.
No. My reading skills have always been a bit of a bother.
"The carpenter at the keyboard takes another dump.
You are just too stupid for this, Derek. You don't
understand what you read. Your intellect - the sum of
your raw intelligence and your accumulated knowledge -
simply are inadequate. You are stupid and of limited
intelligence, so you prefer to remain stupid."
Slackjaw Jon Date: 2002-01-13
"Once again, FirstRectumSweat, you need to read more
carefully; a task I'm afraid is forever beyond your reach."
Slackjaw Jon Date: 2001-07-26
Her posts are so full of science I can barely understand
half of them, so I'm bound to make the odd mistake
from time to time.
pearl
> The filthy HIV-transmitting whore frequenter wrote:
> >
> > WELL?
>
> There's nothing to discuss
Suddenly there's nothing to discuss? lol.
> with a proven liar
There certainly is no discussing anything with you.
> who talks
> about "a few days of my studying patent law", when you
> have never studied patent law in your life.
I know what I have and haven't done. You don't, liar boil.
>
pearl
> > Methinks mr. haw haw is (as) ever going to feel rather
> > uncomfortable on the issue of fountains of energized gas.
> >
> So am I. What the heck are they?
Good grief, Derek.. even my friend Dotty got that one. <lol!>
pearl
> Her posts are so full of science I can barely understand
> half of them, so I'm bound to make the odd mistake
> from time to time.
Ahhh... You're a good chum, Derek. :)
Cheers.
>
>
Derek
"pearl" <t...@signguestbook.ie> wrote in message news:ba3lfm$l69$1...@kermit.esat.net...
> Cheers.
>
Rah rah.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
Derek, go fuck yourself. Sleazeweed has no understanding of science
and never uses science as support for her fantasy-world bullshit. The
only times she correctly cites a true scientific source it is purely
by accident. You're lying and you know damn well you're lying. The
only truth in your entire statement is YOU don't understand science
either. The undeniable evidence of her lack of scientific knowledge
has been noted so often that you are intentionally being a
brown-nosing shit-stirrer to say otherwise. You chastised Dutch
recently for his supposed inability to support his arguments and
suggested he stand on his own. Let slutweed do the same. You're not
intelligent enough to really help her, all you can do is cloud the
argument with lame attempts at mis-direction, so let her explain why
she thinks unsupported claims on amateur websites are scientific
evidence or why she supposedly read Billings' website (which does cite
scientific evidence) and still doesn't understand one fucking word of
it.
so I'm bound to make the odd mistake
> from time to time.
Hehe, that's fucking funny.
Kevin
Derek
"Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a3531610.0305...@posting.google.com...
No. You go fuck yourself and the whore you rode in with.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
Dishonest snipping and non-responsiveness noted. You lied by
claiming slutweed supports her claims with scientific evidence. Why
did you lie?
Kevin
pearl
> Sleazeweed has no understanding of science
> and never uses science as support for her fantasy-world bullshit.
<snip rest of rabid froth>
You're lying and you know damn well you're lying, brandy.
Derek
A non-response is somewhat different to what I just told you
to do. It might not've been the response you expected, but it's
a response non-the-less.
> You lied by claiming lilweed supports her claims with scientific
> evidence.
No, I didn't.
> Why did you lie?
>
YOU won't catch me doing something like that, mediocre Kevin.
Jonathan Ball
> "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a3531610.0305...@posting.google.com...
>
>>Sleazeweed has no understanding of science
>>and never uses science as support for her fantasy-world bullshit.
>
>
> <snip rest of rabid froth>
>
> You're lying and you know damn well you're lying, brandy.
>
> Explain this;
>
> http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
out of a hole in the earth.
You're a stupid junk-science believing whore.
pearl
Where is it coming from?
>
Jonathan Ball
The earth's atmosphere, you stupid dumb fuck.
Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
the earth?
pearl
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
news:3EC7AFFD...@whitehouse.not...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>>Explain this;
> >>>
> >>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> >>
> >>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
> >>out of a hole in the earth.
> >
> > Where is it coming from?
>
> The earth's atmosphere,
The ionosphere?
'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole
where RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere
into space as DE-1 arced to about 4.6 Earth radii above the pole
(the orbit was 464 x 23,370 km [288 x 14,490 mi]).
"The more we measured it," he said, "the more we realized that this
was a big source of material." RIMS measured ions of hydrogen,
helium, oxygen, and nitrogen rising at different speeds and on
different trajectories.
Apparently, the particles that slammed into the ionosphere to
paint the aurora borealis also energized enough atoms to head
spaceward. (The same is true of the south pole where DE-1
made similar observations.) The acceleration mechanism is
not fully understood, though.'
If it is from the ionosphere, it cannot be slamming into the ionosphere
(the top layer of Earth's atmosphere from about 60 km to 1000 km).
'Starting with the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts by
the first U.S. satellite in 1958, scientists have known that the
Earth is surrounded by a cloud of electrified gas. This cloud,
called the magnetosphere, is constrained by Earth's magnetic
field, compressed by the solar wind to within about 100,000 km
of the Earth on the sunward side, and drawn out by the solar wind
to more than a million km on the night side.'
How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
> Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
> the earth?
'pretend'? Why pretend?
'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
The picture alone says it all.
>
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC7C958...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
>>
> news:3EC7AFFD...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>
> <...>
>
>>>>>Explain this;
>>>>>
>>>>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
>>>>
>>>>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
>>>>out of a hole in the earth.
>>>
>>>Where is it coming from?
>>
>>The earth's atmosphere,
>
>
> The ionosphere?
>
> 'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole
> where RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere
Yes, you stupid junk-science-swallowing twat: "gases
flowing upward from the ionosphere..." What the FUCK
do you think that means, twat?
Jonathan Ball
You STUPID, IGNORANT TWAT: of course it's slamming
into the ionosphere: FROM ABOVE! GOD FUCKING DAMN IT,
you ignorant HIV-eaten slut, can't you figure ANYTHING out?
>
> 'Starting with the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts by
> the first U.S. satellite in 1958, scientists have known that the
> Earth is surrounded by a cloud of electrified gas. This cloud,
> called the magnetosphere, is constrained by Earth's magnetic
> field, compressed by the solar wind to within about 100,000 km
> of the Earth on the sunward side, and drawn out by the solar wind
> to more than a million km on the night side.'
>
> How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
It's thin.
>
>
>>Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
>>the earth?
>
>
> 'pretend'? Why pretend?
>
> 'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
> Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
> of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
No mention of holes in that. You're pretending to see
something about holes in the earth. There is nothing
about that.
>
> The picture alone says it all.
It says you're a stupid cunt. The picture shows no
holes in the earth.
Jonathan Ball
>
> The picture alone says it all.
The "picture" is an artist's representation. It is not
a photograph of the earth. The "picture" also doesn't
show any hole in the earth.
You STUPID, STUPID bitch.
pearl
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
news:3EC7C958...@whitehouse.not...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message
> >>
> > news:3EC7AFFD...@whitehouse.not...
> >
> >>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> > <...>
> >
> >>>>>Explain this;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> >>>>
> >>>>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
> >>>>out of a hole in the earth.
> >>>
> >>>Where is it coming from?
> >>
> >>The earth's atmosphere,
> >
> > The ionosphere?
> >
> > 'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole
> > where RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere
>
> flowing upward from the ionosphere..." What
It means that gases were detected rising from the ionosphere,
it doesn't mean it was created by, and originated from the
ionosphere, though.
>
USual sUSpect
>>>>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
>>>>out of a hole in the earth.
>>>
>>>Where is it coming from?
>>
>>The earth's atmosphere,
>
> The ionosphere?
The answer is in the paragraph right above the one you started your
quote: "The perception started to change in the mid-1980s following the
Aug. 3, 1981, launch of two Dynamics Explorer satellites designed to
study the magnetosphere near the Earth. DE-1 carried Chappell's
Retarding Ion Mass Spectrometer (RIMS), designed to measure the
population of the PLASMASPHERE, A TORUS OR DONUT OF LOW-ENERGY IN THE
INNER MAGNETOSPHERE." [my emphasis] The *source* of the gases is
detailed below in response to your question about why you are accused of
pretending.
<snip>
Oh yeah. YOU SNIPPED AN OPERATIVE PART OF THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH!! --
> Apparently, the particles that slammed into the ionosphere to
> paint the aurora borealis also energized enough atoms to head
> spaceward. (The same is true of the south pole where DE-1
> made similar observations.) The acceleration mechanism is
> not fully understood, though.'
Here is what you left out: "Giles said that very low frequency (VLF)
radio waves, EMITTED IN THE MAGNETOSPHERE, may contribute energy." [my
emphasis] There is nothing to any effect that any terrestrial hole plays
a role in either source or energy.
<snip>
> How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
Gases are not "created," they are already present throughout the atmosphere.
>>Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
>>the earth?
>
> 'pretend'? Why pretend?
The article says NOTHING about holes in the earth; that is your
conjecture. The article details polar plasma flows in the magnetosphere
and suggests a reason for such effects. Chappell could not be more clear
about the source of the gases studied:
"The more we measured [the ionosphere]," he said, "the more we realized
that this [ionosphere] was a big source of material." RIMS measured ions
of hydrogen, helium, oxygen, and nitrogen rising at different speeds and
on different trajectories.
> 'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
> Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
> of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
Up till 1492, an awful lot of scientists also thought our planet was
flat. Still, the "fountain" is considered to be an atmospheric
phenomenon -- not terrestrial.
> The picture alone says it all.
Then stick to picture books rather than science journals and leave
science to more academic minds. Plasma physics appears to be out of your
grasp anyway.
Jonathan Ball
It's what happened, as you would know if you had any
FUCKING IDEA what the ionosphere is. You don't, of
course, because you're a stupid twat.
Jonathan Ball
> pearl wrote:
[...]
>
>> The picture alone says it all.
>
>
> Then stick to picture books rather than science journals and leave
> science to more academic minds. Plasma physics appears to be out of your
> grasp anyway.
This is just another example of ~~HIVweed's~~ usual
mis-citation of science. ~~HIVweed~~ has never studied
science in her life. She never even attended
university, and I think she's probably a "school
leaver", the British term for those who don't graduate
from secondary school.
It's really funny that she says she "understands"
science. This isn't even true science she's completely
fucked up; it's a popularization of science intended
for mass consumption. EVEN THAT she can't get right.
She wouldn't begin to know with something from a
scientific professional journa.
pearl
> into the ionosphere: FROM ABOVE!
Let's see.. it's rising at a tremendous rate at various trajectories,
yet is slamming into itself from above. Yeah, that makes sense.
> > 'Starting with the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts by
> > the first U.S. satellite in 1958, scientists have known that the
> > Earth is surrounded by a cloud of electrified gas. This cloud,
> > called the magnetosphere, is constrained by Earth's magnetic
> > field, compressed by the solar wind to within about 100,000 km
> > of the Earth on the sunward side, and drawn out by the solar wind
> > to more than a million km on the night side.'
> >
> > How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
>
> It's thin.
It is? How 'thin'? Explain the process of the creation of these gases.
> >>Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
> >>the earth?
> >
> > 'pretend'? Why pretend?
> >
> > 'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
> > Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> > Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> > particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> > comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> > accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> > 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
> > of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
>
> No mention of holes in that. You're pretending to see
> something about holes in the earth. There is nothing
> about that.
So where are these polar fountains originating from?
Some magical gas creating mechanism located over the poles in the sky?
> > The picture alone says it all.
>
> The picture shows no holes in the earth.
That's sure what it looks like.
>
pearl
> >
> > The picture alone says it all.
>
> The "picture" is an artist's representation. It is not
> a photograph of the earth. The "picture" also doesn't
> show any hole in the earth.
Where is this magical gas creating mechanism in the sky
just over the poles?
>
pearl
Explain the fountain of gas creating mechanism located
over the poles then.
USual sUSpect
>>of course it's slamming
>>into the ionosphere: FROM ABOVE!
>
> Let's see.. it's rising at a tremendous rate at various trajectories,
> yet is slamming into itself from above. Yeah, that makes sense.
As much as I've disagreed with Jonathan about some things, I couldn't
agree with him more than I do about you, Pearl. Did you even read the
article? All of this effect, including ENERGY and SOURCE, take place in
the atmosphere. This is NOT a terrestrial (land) phenomenon.
<snip>
> So where are these polar fountains originating from?
The part you snipped from one paragraph told you the source of energy:
"Giles said that very low frequency (VLF) radio waves, EMITTED IN THE
MAGNETOSPHERE, may contribute energy."
> Some magical gas creating mechanism located over the poles in the sky?
The ionosphere. "The more we measured [the ionosphere]," [Chappell]
said, "the more we realized that this [ionosphere] was a big source of
material."
>>>The picture alone says it all.
>>
>>The picture shows no holes in the earth.
>
> That's sure what it looks like.
It's probably "elephant and the blind men" until you read the article
and understand what it actually says.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC7EA1...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>>>>>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
>>>>>>out of a hole in the earth.
>>>>>
>>>>>Where is it coming from?
>>>>
>>>>The earth's atmosphere,
>>>
>>>The ionosphere?
>>>
>>>'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole
>>>where RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere
>>>into space as DE-1 arced to about 4.6 Earth radii above the pole
>>>(the orbit was 464 x 23,370 km [288 x 14,490 mi]).
>>>
>>>"The more we measured it," he said, "the more we realized that this
>>>was a big source of material." RIMS measured ions of hydrogen,
>>>helium, oxygen, and nitrogen rising at different speeds and on
>>>different trajectories.
>>>
>>>Apparently, the particles that slammed into the ionosphere to
>>>paint the aurora borealis also energized enough atoms to head
>>>spaceward. (The same is true of the south pole where DE-1
>>>made similar observations.) The acceleration mechanism is
>>>not fully understood, though.'
>>>
>>>If it is from the ionosphere, it cannot be slamming into the ionosphere
>>>(the top layer of Earth's atmosphere from about 60 km to 1000 km).
>>
>>of course it's slamming
>>into the ionosphere: FROM ABOVE!
>
>
> Let's see.. it's rising at a tremendous rate at various trajectories,
> yet is slamming into itself from above. Yeah, that makes sense.
You are are so amazingly, deliberately stupid.
The sun's radiation is what is slamming into the
ionosphere, creating the ions (hint to ~~HIVweed~~:
that's why it's CALLED the ionosphere.) The magnetic
field of the earth then concentrates the ions at the
poles, and they are then shot up into space.
>
>
>>>'Starting with the discovery of the Van Allen radiation belts by
>>>the first U.S. satellite in 1958, scientists have known that the
>>>Earth is surrounded by a cloud of electrified gas. This cloud,
>>>called the magnetosphere, is constrained by Earth's magnetic
>>>field, compressed by the solar wind to within about 100,000 km
>>>of the Earth on the sunward side, and drawn out by the solar wind
>>>to more than a million km on the night side.'
>>>
>>>How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
>>
>>It's thin.
>
>
> It is? How 'thin'? Explain the process of the creation of these gases.
The gases are always there.
The ionosphere is very thin compared to the lower parts
of the atmosphere. Read the page, you stupid slut:
You don't need to stock up on bottled air - the
leakage is tiny compared to Earth's atmosphere
You stupid, STUPID bitch.
>
>
>>>>Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
>>>>the earth?
>>>
>>>'pretend'? Why pretend?
>>>
>>>'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
>>>Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
>>>Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
>>>particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
>>>comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
>>>accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
>>>1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
>>>of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
>>
>>No mention of holes in that. You're pretending to see
>>something about holes in the earth. There is nothing
>>about that.
>
>
> So where are these polar fountains originating from?
Read the page you cited, you stupid whore. It's
obvious you didn't read it.
> Some magical gas creating mechanism located over the poles in the sky?
>
>
>>>The picture alone says it all.
>>
>>The picture shows no holes in the earth.
>
>
> That's sure what it looks like.
No, it doesn't. It doesn't show any holes.
A gullible, pseudoscience-swallowing whore like you can
see whatever she wants in an artist's rendering like that.
Jonathan Ball
The earth's magnetic field, you stupid, STUPID bitch.
Jonathan Ball
Which she is unable to do.
One other thing you need to understand about
~~HIVweed~~: she believes in, and possible even uses
and/or sells, something called the "zapper", a
fraudulent little piece of pseudoscientific
quack-medicine junk "invented" by a known, CONVICTED
fraudster named "Dr." Hulda Clark.
pearl
> pearl wrote:
> >>>>Nothing in that page says or suggests the gas is coming
> >>>>out of a hole in the earth.
> >>>
> >>>Where is it coming from?
> >>
> >>The earth's atmosphere,
> >
> > The ionosphere?
>
> The answer is in the paragraph right above the one you started your
> quote: "The perception started to change in the mid-1980s following the
> Aug. 3, 1981, launch of two Dynamics Explorer satellites designed to
> study the magnetosphere near the Earth. DE-1 carried Chappell's
> Retarding Ion Mass Spectrometer (RIMS), designed to measure the
> population of the PLASMASPHERE, A TORUS OR DONUT OF LOW-ENERGY IN THE
> INNER MAGNETOSPHERE." [my emphasis]
huh? What's your point?
> The *source* of the gases is
> detailed below in response to your question about why you are accused of
> pretending.
Your altered version of it you mean.
> <snip>
>
> Oh yeah. YOU SNIPPED AN OPERATIVE PART OF THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH!! --
?
> > Apparently, the particles that slammed into the ionosphere to
> > paint the aurora borealis also energized enough atoms to head
> > spaceward. (The same is true of the south pole where DE-1
> > made similar observations.) The acceleration mechanism is
> > not fully understood, though.'
>
> Here is what you left out: "Giles said that very low frequency (VLF)
> radio waves, EMITTED IN THE MAGNETOSPHERE, may contribute energy." [my
> emphasis] There is nothing to any effect that any terrestrial hole plays
> a role in either source or energy.
You're saying that the magnetosphere which 'may well be filled by
a fountain of energized gas blowing from the north and south poles'
is the source of itself? Now you're confusing me. (lol).
> <snip>
Oh yeah. YOU SNIPPED AN OPERATIVE PART OF THE
FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH!! -- shame on you, fool.
> > How on earth could all of that gas be created by our ionosphere?
>
> Gases are not "created," they are already present throughout the atmosphere.
They must have been created somewhere to have been filling the magnetosphere.
> >>Why did you pretend the NASA page was about a hole in
> >>the earth?
> >
> > 'pretend'? Why pretend?
>
> The article says NOTHING about holes in the earth; that is your
> conjecture. The article details polar plasma flows in the magnetosphere
> and suggests a reason for such effects. Chappell could not be more clear
> about the source of the gases studied:
>
> "The more we measured [the ionosphere]," he said, "the more we realized
> that this [ionosphere] was a big source of material." RIMS measured ions
> of hydrogen, helium, oxygen, and nitrogen rising at different speeds and
> on different trajectories.
Nope. You just added the [ionosphere] parts.
This, which you snipped, preceded the paragraph you altered above;
'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole where
RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere into space
as DE-1 arced to about 4.6 Earth radii above the pole (the orbit was
464 x 23,370 km [288 x 14,490 mi]).' - The source he was referring to
was the flow from the polar fountain, not the ionosphere.
> > 'Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions
> > Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> > Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> > particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> > comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> > accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> > 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a fountain
> > of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
>
> Up till 1492, an awful lot of scientists also thought our planet was
> flat. Still, the "fountain" is considered to be an atmospheric
> phenomenon -- not terrestrial.
Show us other examples of atmospheric fountains please.
> > The picture alone says it all.
>
> Then stick to picture books rather than science journals and leave
> science to more academic minds. Plasma physics appears to be out of your
> grasp anyway.
You should have stayed out of this. You've just been proved a liar.
>
pearl
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC7F0E7...@whitehouse.not...
The earth's magnetic field creates fountains of energized gas?
How? Do explain.
>
USual sUSpect
<snip>
> in, and possible even uses and/or sells, something called the "zapper",
> a fraudulent little piece of pseudoscientific quack-medicine junk
> "invented" by a known, CONVICTED fraudster named "Dr." Hulda Clark.
I remember seeing a story about her (Clark) on Dateline or 20/20 or one
of those shows a few years ago; she was a fugitive, as I recall. I'm
pretty sure I'd stop using stuff my doctor gave me if my doctor fled
jurisdiction for fraud and related charges, much less told me I had a
disease I didn't really have (as I believe Clark was accused at the time).
USual sUSpect
<snip>
>>detailed below in response to your question about why you are accused of
>>pretending.
>
> Your altered version of it you mean.
Actually, I recited the version in the article. It's quite clear you
have trouble comprehending the article which is why you are lashing out
at JB and me.
> You're saying that the magnetosphere which 'may well be filled by
> a fountain of energized gas blowing from the north and south poles'
> is the source of itself? Now you're confusing me. (lol).
I'm not confusing you, you're already confused. The source is the
ionosphere. The energy comes from very low frequency (VLF) energy in the
magnetosphere. None of this has anything to do with anything happening
within 43-50 miles (going up to 400 miles or so) of the planet. In other
words, it's all way up there.
> Oh yeah. YOU SNIPPED AN OPERATIVE PART OF THE
> FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH!! -- shame on you, fool.
I did not.
>>Gases are not "created," they are already present throughout the atmosphere.
>
> They must have been created somewhere to have been filling the magnetosphere.
'In 1987, Chappell and the RIMS team published a paper describing the
polar ion fountain and described the ionosphere as a "fully adequate
source of material for the magnetosphere."'
>>The article says NOTHING about holes in the earth; that is your
>>conjecture. The article details polar plasma flows in the magnetosphere
>>and suggests a reason for such effects. Chappell could not be more clear
>>about the source of the gases studied:
>>
>>"The more we measured [the ionosphere]," he said, "the more we realized
>>that this [ionosphere] was a big source of material." RIMS measured ions
>>of hydrogen, helium, oxygen, and nitrogen rising at different speeds and
>>on different trajectories.
>
> Nope. You just added the [ionosphere] parts.
I did not. I correctly clarified for you the antecedent of the pronoun
"it" in "The more we measured it," he said, "the more we realized that
this was a big source of material." It equals ionosphere.
> This, which you snipped, preceded the paragraph you altered above;
> 'To Chappell's surprise, the real find was around the north pole where
> RIMS measured gases flowing upward from the ionosphere into space
> as DE-1 arced to about 4.6 Earth radii above the pole (the orbit was
> 464 x 23,370 km [288 x 14,490 mi]).' - The source he was referring to
> was the flow from the polar fountain, not the ionosphere.
You need to read the whole article again, pearlie. The source IS the
ionosphere. "It" = ionosphere.
>>Up till 1492, an awful lot of scientists also thought our planet was
>>flat. Still, the "fountain" is considered to be an atmospheric
>>phenomenon -- not terrestrial.
>
> Show us other examples of atmospheric fountains please.
Why?
>>>The picture alone says it all.
>>
>>Then stick to picture books rather than science journals and leave
>>science to more academic minds. Plasma physics appears to be out of your
>>grasp anyway.
>
> You should have stayed out of this. You've just been proved a liar.
You've been proved a complete flake. Now go get some beauty sleep.
pearl
> 'In 1987, Chappell and the RIMS team published a paper describing the
> polar ion fountain and described the ionosphere as a "fully adequate
> source of material for the magnetosphere."'
OK. I can't argue with that.
Off to get my beauty sleep.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
I'm not sure about her telling patients they had diseases they
actually didn't (although it's quite likely). Clark has claimed,
however, that AIDS, diabetes, hepatitis, cancer (all types), and
practically every other disease afflicting humans are ALL caused by an
intestinal parasite that is supposedly harmless as long as it remains
in the intestines but causes these illnesses when it moves to other
organs. Of course, according to Clark, simply removing this parasite
is a cure for these diseases. Sleazeweed believes every word of it.
Kevin
Kevin and Donna Brandon
> "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a3531610.0305...@posting.google.com...
> > Sleazeweed has no understanding of science
> > and never uses science as support for her fantasy-world bullshit.
>
> <snip rest of rabid froth>
>
> You're lying and you know damn well you're lying, brandy.
First off, you illiterate slut, 'brandi' has never used profanity,
even when talking to a fuckheaded, poorly-educated shit such as you.
Second, my name was at the bottom of the post so learn to fucking
read. If you really want to be confused by someone's identity, ask
your pal Derek why, only a few days ago, he called someone else
(Camcompany) by his own fucking name! Third, there wasn't a single lie
in anything I said. Every word I have ever said about you is true and
everyone knows it.
>
> Explain this;
>
> http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm
> Polar fountains fill magnetosphere with ions. [x] -see image on page.
> 'Since the late 1950s and '60s, scientists have believed that the
> Earth's magnetic field has captured a lot of the solar wind - charged
> particles flowing out from the sun - and formed an immense,
> comet-like cloud of electrified gas that surrounds our planet. An
> accidental discovery in the 1980s and new data collected since
> 1996 indicate that this magnetosphere may well be filled by a
> fountain of energized gas (right) blowing from the north and south poles.'
I believe Jonathan and 'usual suspect' have both attempted to
explain this to you. Simply put, there is nothing about this
information that could possibly lead any intelligent person to
conclude the earth is hollow. Not one damn word of it supports your
claims. Why the fuck are you misinterpreting scientific information
after claiming I lied (and I believe you earlier claimed Donna lied)
when I stated you do precisely that? You' are too fucking stupid to
know any damn better.
Kevin
Kevin and Donna Brandon
> "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a3531610.0305...@posting.google.com...
> > > "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a3531610.0305...@posting.google.com...
> > > > > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC482EE...@whitehouse.not...
> > > > > > Derek wrote:
> > > > > > > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC47DFB...@whitehouse.not...
> > > > > > >>Derek wrote:
> > > > > > >>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>and she also believes
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>Believed.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> What changed that belief
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
> > > > > > >>>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
> > > > > > >>>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
> > > > > > >>>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
> > > > > > >>>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
> > > > > > >>>>thrashing from Dreck.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
> > > > > > >>>I was let off quite easily.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I didn't read her posts correctly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bizarrely, you did.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. My reading skills have always been a bit of a bother.
> > > > >
> > > > > "The carpenter at the keyboard takes another dump.
> > > > > You are just too stupid for this, Derek. You don't
> > > > > understand what you read. Your intellect - the sum of
> > > > > your raw intelligence and your accumulated knowledge -
> > > > > simply are inadequate. You are stupid and of limited
> > > > > intelligence, so you prefer to remain stupid."
> > > > > Slackjaw Jon Date: 2002-01-13
> > > > >
> > > > > "Once again, FirstRectumSweat, you need to read more
> > > > > carefully; a task I'm afraid is forever beyond your reach."
> > > > > Slackjaw Jon Date: 2001-07-26
> > > > >
> > > > > Her posts are so full of science I can barely understand
> > > > > half of them,
> > > >
> > > > Derek, go fuck yourself.
> > >
> > > No. You go fuck yourself and the whore you rode in with.
> >
> > Dishonest snipping and non-responsiveness noted.
>
> A non-response is somewhat different to what I just told you
> to do. It might not've been the response you expected, but it's
> a response non-the-less.
>
> > You lied by claiming lilweed supports her claims with scientific
> > evidence.
>
> No, I didn't.
>
> > Why did you lie?
> >
> YOU won't catch me doing something like that, mediocre Kevin.
You are a liar and a fraud, Derek Ray. Everything about you is
beneath mediocre. Slutweed has ZERO comprehension of science and
everyone, including you, knows that to be a fact.
Kevin
Jonathan Ball
But you WERE arguing with it for half a dozen posts
now. Why didn't you READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE, you
stupid, STUPID bitch?
>
> Off to get my beauty sleep.
Off to snort a couple of grams of cocaine is more like it.
Jonathan Ball
Why don't you try a couple of decades of brain sleep,
you stupid, STUPID bitch?
Jonathan Ball
>
>
>>I didn't read her posts correctly. What do you think
>>she meant by, "Why do you think i capitulated so
>>easily to you? " Date: 2003-02-10
>>I was let off and you know it.
>
>
> It's all good, Derek.
>
> Methinks mr. haw haw is (as) ever going to feel rather
> uncomfortable on the issue of fountains of energized gas.
Words foolishly uttered that you lived to regret, you
stupid, STUPID bitch. You were sniffing a little too
much energized gas when you wrote that howler, weren't you?
Jonathan Ball
Why didn't you READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE, you stupid,
STUPID bitch?
Jonathan Ball
You should have READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE, you stupid,
STUPID bitch.
Jonathan Ball
You argued with it for EIGHT moronic posts this
afternoon, you stupid, STUPID bitch. Why didn't you
READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE first?
USual sUSpect
> I'm not sure about her telling patients they had diseases they
> actually didn't (although it's quite likely). Clark has claimed,
> however, that AIDS, diabetes, hepatitis, cancer (all types), and
> practically every other disease afflicting humans are ALL caused by an
> intestinal parasite that is supposedly harmless as long as it remains
> in the intestines but causes these illnesses when it moves to other
> organs. Of course, according to Clark, simply removing this parasite
> is a cure for these diseases. Sleazeweed believes every word of it.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/clark.html
Scroll down to "LEGAL TROUBLE," second paragraph. I seem to recall from
the expose on TV that there were many such accusations from normal
people, not just investigators.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC482EE...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>Derek wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC47DFB...@whitehouse.not...
>>>
>>>>Derek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC3E80F...@whitehouse.not...
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and she also believes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Believed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What changed that belief
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Seeing the patent for the globe Marshall B. Gardner manufactured
>>>>>>>in order to demonstrate his theory, based on mathematics and
>>>>>>>astronomy, that the Earth is a hollow sphere with openings at both
>>>>>>>poles, and at the centre of which is a central sun.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It took WEEKS of my kicking your fucking ignorant head
>>>>>>in before you changed your shitty tune. That, and a
>>>>>>thrashing from Dreck.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's a lie, and if you read the thread again you'll see
>>>>>I was let off quite easily.
>>>>
>>>>What the fuck do you mean, *you* were let off?
>>>
>>
>
>
> No. My reading skills have always been a bit of a bother.
>
> "The carpenter at the keyboard takes another dump.
> You are just too stupid for this, Derek. You don't
> understand what you read. Your intellect - the sum of
> your raw intelligence and your accumulated knowledge -
> simply are inadequate. You are stupid and of limited
> intelligence, so you prefer to remain stupid."
> Slackjaw Jon Date: 2002-01-13
>
> "Once again, FirstRectumSweat, you need to read more
> carefully; a task I'm afraid is forever beyond your reach."
> Slackjaw Jon Date: 2001-07-26
>
> Her posts are so full of science I can barely understand
> from time to time.
There is no science in that stupid, STUPID bitch's
posts, ever. She can't read a word of science.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3EC9A55C...@whitehouse.not...
> read a word of science.
>
link to verify her claims. I don't agree with every claim she
makes, and I have no qualms in refuting the one's I find
doubtful, but I don't refute them by claiming she's an idiot
as you insist I do. You lied through your perfect American
teeth on that score, Jon. You can't deny that you did.
--
Let the advocate of animal food, force himself to a decisive
experiment on its fitness, and as Plutarch recommends, tear
a living lamb with his teeth, and plunging his head into its vitals,
slake his thirst with the steaming blood; when fresh from the
deed of horror let him revert to the irresistible instincts of nature
that would rise in judgment against it, and say, Nature formed
me for such work as this. Then, and then only, would he be
consistent. Man resembles no carnivorous animal.
Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822)
Derek
> If you really want to be confused by someone's
> identity, ask your pal Derek why, only a few days
> ago, he called someone else (Camcompany) by his
> own fucking name!
When was that, blowhard Brandon?
btw, did you marry Donna recently?
Jonathan Ball
You mean like the links on "inner earth beings" and the
patent on the "discovery" of hollow earth? Heh heh heh...
Derek
"Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a3531610.03051...@posting.google.com...
> > > You lied by claiming lilweed supports her claims with scientific
> > > evidence.
> >
> > No, I didn't.
> >
> > > Why did you lie?
> > >
> > YOU won't catch me doing something like that, mediocre Kevin.
>
>
> You are a liar and a fraud, Derek Ray.
Why the "Derek Ray" bit. Whassat all about?
> Everything about you is beneath mediocre.
Nope. Considering my average schooling I do
alright thankyou very much.
> Slutweed has ZERO comprehension of science and
> everyone, including you, knows that to be a fact.
>
Nope. She knows more about science than I ever will
in these issues raised here, and that's THE fact.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA3BA2...@whitehouse.not...
commenting on your lies, "I don't agree with every claim
she makes, and I have no qualms in refuting the one's I
find doubtful, but I don't refute them by claiming she's an
idiot as you insist I do. You lied through your perfect
American teeth on that score, Jon. You can't deny that
you did."
Will you admit you lied, or are you going to snip this part
away as well?
Jonathan Ball
I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
>
> Will you admit you lied,
I didn't lie. Go fuck yourself.
> or are you going to snip this part
> away as well?
In effect, you DID call her an idiot. You bent over
backward to try not to do so, but you did, and the
stupid, STUPID bitch got good and huffy over it.
She can scarcely even SPELL science, let alone read and
cite any of it. She's an airhead.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5137...@whitehouse.not...
done you would still be beating me over the head with
it. You have though. You lied by stating very clearly
that I called lilweed an idiot. Gotcha Jon.
> >
> > Will you admit you lied,
>
> I didn't lie.
You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
I didn't think I'd ever catch YOU lying, but patience is
a virtue, and I got you in the end just exactly as I knew
I would one day. Shame on you.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5137...@whitehouse.not...
>>>>>Unlike your contributions, ~~HIVweed~~ always provides a
>>>>>good link to verify her claims.
>>>>
>>>>You mean like the links on "inner earth beings" and the
>>>>patent on the "discovery" of hollow earth? Heh heh heh...
>>>
>>>As I said earlier, but you snipped it away...
>>
>>I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
>>
>
> I have never lied about a single issue or point.
You lie daily. Among other things, your claim to being
a "vegan" is a lie: you eat at least dairy, and I
suspect you throw down the occasional lamb chop.
>
>>>Will you admit you lied,
>>
>>I didn't lie.
>
>
> You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
Effectively, you did.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5564...@whitehouse.not...
> Derek wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5137...@whitehouse.not...
>
> >>>>>Unlike your contributions, ~~HIVweed~~ always provides a
> >>>>>good link to verify her claims.
> >>>>
> >>>>You mean like the links on "inner earth beings" and the
> >>>>patent on the "discovery" of hollow earth? Heh heh heh...
> >>>
> >>>As I said earlier, but you snipped it away...
> >>
> >>I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
> >
> > I have never lied about a single issue or point.
>
> You lie daily. Among other things, your claim to being
> a "vegan" is a lie: you eat at least dairy, and I
> suspect you throw down the occasional lamb chop.
>
assumptions but instead rely on the accusations of
others who have admitted to lying about me. So much
for your integrity.
> >
> >>>Will you admit you lied,
> >>
> >>I didn't lie.
> >
> > You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
>
> Effectively, you did.
>
because of that and your other lies.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5564...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>Derek wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5137...@whitehouse.not...
>>
>>>>>>>Unlike your contributions, ~~HIVweed~~ always provides a
>>>>>>>good link to verify her claims.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You mean like the links on "inner earth beings" and the
>>>>>>patent on the "discovery" of hollow earth? Heh heh heh...
>>>>>
>>>>>As I said earlier, but you snipped it away...
>>>>
>>>>I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
>>>
>>>I have never lied about a single issue or point.
>>
>>You lie daily. Among other things, your claim to being
>>a "vegan" is a lie: you eat at least dairy, and I
>>suspect you throw down the occasional lamb chop.
>>
>
> Unluckily for you, you have no way of proving your
> assumptions but instead rely on the accusations of
> others who have admitted to lying about me. So much
> for your integrity.
You gobble the stuff down.
>
>>>>>Will you admit you lied,
>>>>
>>>>I didn't lie.
>>>
>>>You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
>>
>>Effectively, you did.
>>
>
> No, I didn't.
Effectively, you did. You didn't literally call her an
idiot, but effectively, you called her an idiot.
With good reason: she IS an idiot.
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5E3B...@whitehouse.not...
> Derek wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5564...@whitehouse.not...
> >
> >>Derek wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5137...@whitehouse.not...
> >>
> >>>>>>>Unlike your contributions, ~~HIVweed~~ always provides a
> >>>>>>>good link to verify her claims.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>You mean like the links on "inner earth beings" and the
> >>>>>>patent on the "discovery" of hollow earth? Heh heh heh...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>As I said earlier, but you snipped it away...
> >>>>
> >>>>I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
> >>>
> >>>I have never lied about a single issue or point.
> >>
> >>You lie daily. Among other things, your claim to being
> >>a "vegan" is a lie: you eat at least dairy, and I
> >>suspect you throw down the occasional lamb chop.
> >
> > Unluckily for you, you have no way of proving your
> > assumptions but instead rely on the accusations of
> > others who have admitted to lying about me. So much
> > for your integrity.
>
> You gobble the stuff down.
>
I don't marks you down as a bigger liar than ever. You lie
about people's beliefs because you can't argue against them
effectively.
> >
> >>>>>Will you admit you lied,
> >>>>
> >>>>I didn't lie.
> >>>
> >>>You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
> >>
> >>Effectively, you did.
> >
> > No, I didn't.
>
> Effectively, you did.
No, I didn't.
> You didn't literally call her an idiot
That's right, and you lied by claiming I did. What else
have you lied about, liar Jon?
> With good reason: she IS an idiot.
>
Nope. She's one of the finest participants here and has
NEVER lied, unlike you, so she certainly has the drop
on you where integrity is concerned.
Jonathan Ball
> "Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA5E3B...@whitehouse.not...
>
>>>>>>I usually snip out your filthy, self-serving lies.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have never lied about a single issue or point.
>>>>
>>>>You lie daily. Among other things, your claim to being
>>>>a "vegan" is a lie: you eat at least dairy, and I
>>>>suspect you throw down the occasional lamb chop.
>>>
>>>Unluckily for you, you have no way of proving your
>>>assumptions but instead rely on the accusations of
>>>others who have admitted to lying about me. So much
>>>for your integrity.
>>
>>You gobble the stuff down.
>>
>
> No, I do not,
Yes, you do.
>
>>>>>>>Will you admit you lied,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I didn't lie.
>>>>>
>>>>>You're still doing it because I never called her an idiot.
>>>>
>>>>Effectively, you did.
>>>
>>>No, I didn't.
>>
>>Effectively, you did.
>
>
> No, I didn't.
Yes, you did.
>
>
>>You didn't literally call her an idiot
>
>
> That's right, and you lied by claiming I did. What else
> have you lied about, liar Jon?
>
>
>>With good reason: she IS an idiot.
>>
>
> Nope.
She is an idiot. She believes in all kinds of weird,
mystical bullshit, and is the most gullible person most
of us ever will have the misfortune to encounter. She
believes in and promotes quack medicine. She also is a
whore.
Claudia Wittgenstein
Sheesh, I see now you have developed into a full fledged troll,
fullquotes and inane commentns an all... planning to implode anytime
soon? Can I assist?
-C.
(PS: I'm back)
Derek
"Jonathan Ball" <jon...@whitehouse.not> wrote in message news:3ECA66DA...@whitehouse.not...
issues. You aren't a credible opponent.
Jonathan Ball
I am being serious. ~~HIVweed~~ is a whore. She's
also an idiot.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
> "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> [..]
> > If you really want to be confused by someone's
> > identity, ask your pal Derek why, only a few days
> > ago, he called someone else (Camcompany) by his
> > own fucking name!
>
> When was that, blowhard Brandon?
"Immoral Jon does understand moral Derek, but
immoral Jon doesn't admit to it, that's all."
Those are your words in reply to Ray. Why did you call him "Derek"?
>
> btw, did you marry Donna recently?
Yes, the first of this month. She started a new e-mail account and
changed everything else to both our names within a few days after.
Kevin
Derek
"Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a3531610.03052...@posting.google.com...
> "Derek" <dere...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message news:<baddk5$qrluo$1...@ID-190488.news.dfncis.de>...
> > "Kevin and Donna Brandon" <kevinandb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > [..]
> > > If you really want to be confused by someone's
> > > identity, ask your pal Derek why, only a few days
> > > ago, he called someone else (Camcompany) by his
> > > own fucking name!
> >
> > When was that, blowhard Brandon?
>
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=b9u34a%24n3tmj%241%40ID-190488.news.dfncis.de&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26q%3Dderek%2BAND%2Bimmoral%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch%26meta%3Dgroup%253Dalt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
>
> "Immoral Jon does understand moral Derek, but
> immoral Jon doesn't admit to it, that's all."
>
out a comma between "moral" and "Derek" making
his sentence appear as if he was referring to me by
the name "moral Derek." I took advantage of it and
made a bit of a joke. Here it is again:
[> I think you will have to define 'Moral' Derek.
He's just like any other bloke, Ray. There's nothing
definite to define really.
> I feel ~~Jonnie~~ will not understand the term.
>
Immoral Jon does understand moral Derek, but
immoral Jon doesn't admit to it, that's all.]
The "term" according to Ray which Jon wouldn't understand
was "moral," but I changed it to "moral Derek."
> Those are your words in reply to Ray. Why did you call him "Derek"?
I was referring to myself as moral Derek in the same light
I referred to Jon as immoral Jon. It's a play on syntax.
> >
> > btw, did you marry Donna recently?
>
> Yes, the first of this month. She started a new e-mail account and
> changed everything else to both our names within a few days after.
>
Congratulations. I hope you both have a long and wonderful life
together.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
>
> > With good reason: she IS an idiot.
> >
There, I corrected it for you. You're welcome. Pay closer attention
next time, Derek Ray.
Kevin
Kevin and Donna Brandon
OK, I'll drop the "Derek Ray" jabs. You still need to stop defending
slutweed, you know she has no credibility andyou only do it to
continue arguing.
> > >
> > > btw, did you marry Donna recently?
> >
> > Yes, the first of this month. She started a new e-mail account and
> > changed everything else to both our names within a few days after.
> >
> Congratulations. I hope you both have a long and wonderful life
> together.
Nothing's really changed except her last name, but she insisted and
I aim to please. She also retired from dancing, she's now the
"Entertainment Director" which is a fancy way of saying she hires and
fires dancers and tells them to get their asses on the stage. It
didn't bother me none, my beer's still free.
Kevin
pearl
> USual sUSpect <ne...@even.try> wrote in message news:<3EC7F5E7...@even.try>...
> > Jonathan Ball wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > One other thing you need to understand about ~~
> > > weed~~: she believes
> > > in, and possible even uses and/or sells, something called the "zapper",
I own a vastly modified zapper. You should get one, but it'd probably kill you..
> > > a fraudulent little piece of pseudoscientific quack-medicine junk
http://www.drclark.net/news/lairesearch.htm
> > > "invented" by a known, CONVICTED fraudster named "Dr." Hulda Clark.
Dr. Clark was not convicted, junkster.
> > I remember seeing a story about her (Clark) on Dateline or 20/20 or one
> > of those shows a few years ago; she was a fugitive, as I recall. I'm
> > pretty sure I'd stop using stuff my doctor gave me if my doctor fled
> > jurisdiction for fraud and related charges, much less told me I had a
> > disease I didn't really have (as I believe Clark was accused at the time).
'The case, which languished for months, was vigorously defended by
Dr. Clark, who denied all of the charges. Earlier this year, the same
Judge sided with Dr. Clark in finding that the Figueroa case against her
had no "no reasonable possibility of prevailing" and ordered the
Figueroas to post a $20,000 bond if they wanted to continue the case.
The Figueroas failed to post the court ordered bond.. '
http://www.healthfreedomlaw.com/
> I'm not sure about her telling patients they had diseases they
> actually didn't (although it's quite likely). Clark has claimed,
> however, that AIDS, diabetes, hepatitis, cancer (all types), and
> practically every other disease afflicting humans are ALL caused by an
> intestinal parasite that is supposedly harmless as long as it remains
> in the intestines but causes these illnesses when it moves to other
> organs. Of course, according to Clark, simply removing this parasite
> is a cure for these diseases.
'Dr. Clark has been recognized around the world as a scientific pioneer
in the advancement of research relating to carcinogenic catalysts. She
has published her findings on the dangers of mercury amalgams in tooth
fillings and benzene in detergents, plastics, food container and even drugs.
All of this to the consternation of the medical establishment. Her findings
on parasitic links to certain forms of cancer have been acknowledged by
thousands of alternative therapy advocates as the most important revelation
concerning countless illnesses that invade the body. She enjoys world wide
acclaim for her ongoing work and writings.'
http://www.healthfreedomlaw.com/Court%20Documents/Century%20Nutrition/History.htm
> weed believes every word of it.
I do believe that HRC's work has great merit.
Many 'alternative' pioneers have been persecuted, their lives and life's work destroyed.
Royal Raymonde Rife was inducing and destroying cancer (and other diseases) at will
back in the 1930's, and what happened to him, his work and people associated with him?
How many millions of people have since died horribly as a result,- because of oinks like
you and other quackpot frauds? You never remark on the fact that doctors are the third
leading cause of death in the United States [Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA) Vol. 284, July 26, 2000], and that drugs are the fourth leading cause of death
[American Family Physician - Vol 56, No 7, November 1, 1997], yet you expend a
great deal of energy persecuting those who genuinely help people recover their health.
What the hell is wrong with you?
pearl
> Derek wrote:
> > Thanks for proving you aren't being serious about these
> > issues.
>
> I am being serious. ~~HIVweed~~ is a whore.
LOL. Sorry, screw-head, money can't buy everything.
Once accurately described as 'a festering sore on the backside
of humankind', the ~boil~ appears to have some ~serious issues~.
I'd be more worried about what you're eating than who you're
hangin with, ~mad-boil~.
Kevin and Donna Brandon
2) My nickname is 'brandi', not 'brandy'.
3) The post you quoted was 100 percent true.
4) I didn't write it, what the heck is wrong with you?
brandi