Odd piece of Coal
Jenny Brien
Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems to
be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
diameter of about 2mm. Did it come out of the mine in this form or is it
perhaps an accedental artefact of tne processing? I'm not sure of the
country of origin, probably Poland.
--
Is this the God who made the nematode?
Is this the God who made the kangaroo?
Inez
It was probably intelligently designed by a god who had waaayyyyyy to
much time on his hands. Probably one of the one's who's now out of
work, Vulcan or someone like that.
Robert Carnegie
> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems to
> be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
> diameter of about 2mm. Did it come out of the mine in this form or is it
> perhaps an accedental artefact of tne processing? I'm not sure of the
> country of origin, probably Poland.
Send it to Ed Conrad and he'll make it into a beautiful necklace.
Jenny Brien
I might have done, but I got tnis by email from Jak Pajak:
<quote>
I tried to reply on the group, but it appears that my reply would NOT
go through the cenzorship. So I am replying on the provate address.
Here is my reply that around a hour ago I tried to place in the group:
Probably you have found a piece of "onion-charcoal", which actually is
a kind of residue that forms on surfaces of UFO vehicles. The
formation of this charcoal is caused by circulation of powerful
magnetic fields around a UFO vehicle. In turn this field catches
particles of organic matter present in the air and compresses this
matter to the surface of UFO's shell. Then the powerful magnetic field
turns this organic matter into charcoal. Thus the process of making
this charcoal is related to the process of making "ozone hole" above
the southern pole of the Earth, as ozone also is "caught" by magnetic
field of the Earth and pushed towards the northern hemisphere of
Earth.
Onion-charcoal is symbolized in Middle-East (Moorish) Architecture,
where domes are usually painted into black to imitate UFO vehicles
covered with such black onion charcoal.
When the layer of onion-charcoal is thick enough, it tends to pill off
and fall to the ground. It probably has happened that such falling
piece fell onto the coal that you purchased.
More information about the onion-charcoal is provided on the web page
"evidence.htm", which can be seen at any amongst following addresses:
http://bible.webng.com/evidence.htm
http://energy.atspace.org/evidence.htm
http://evidence.ueuo.com/evidence.htm
http://evil.thefreehost.biz/evidence.htm
http://fruit.sitesled.com/evidence.htm
http://fruit.xphost.org/evidence.htm
http://god.ez-sites.ws/evidence.htm
http://karma.freewebpages.org/evidence.htm
http://memorial.awardspace.info/evidence.htm
http://newzealand.myfreewebs.net/evidence.htm
http://nirvana.scienceontheweb.net/evidence.htm
http://pigs.freehyperspace.com/evidence.htm
http://parasitism.about.tc/evidence.htm
http://parasitism.xphost.org/evidence.htm
http://rubik.hits.io/evidence.htm
http://users3.nofeehost.com/devils/evidence.htm
http://wszewilki.greatnow.com/evidence.htm
It is worth to notice, that UFO vehicles appear on the Earth in many
versions and sizes. Apart from large crew-carrying vehicles, which
people see most frequently, there are also miniature, computer-
controlled probes. The diameters of these probes sometimes can be as
small as just a few millimeters. In UFOlogy such miniature UFO-probes
are known under the name of "orbs" or "rods" (depending whether they
are seen from their discoidal side, or from their linear side).
Photographs of "orbs" you can see if in addresses above the name
"evidence.htm" you exchange for the name of the web page
"landslips.htm" (see "Fig. 5" and "Fig. 6" in there). In turn a
photographs of "rods" you can see if the name "evidence.htm" in
addresses above you replace with the name "aliens.htm" (see "Fig. 5"
in there), or "explain.htm" (see "Fig. U18" in there).
Please, keep this strange charcoal, as it is a vital UFO evidence -
but do NOT break it, it is fragile. If possible I would also like to
obtain a sample of it for research (my email address is on the web
page "pajak_jan_uk.htm").
</quote>
Alas, Jan, curiousity got the better of me and I did break it. It looks
nothing like your description of "onion charcoal" so I must reject that as
a possible source. It is throughout a conglomerate of tiny spherical
particles that appear to be coal, not charcoal. At present, my best theory
is that it may havs formed in the washing, with particles of coal becoming
round like pebbles in a stream, and then somehow coagulating.
I have no idea how it could have formed naturaiiy pre-extraction, but I am
open to suggestions.
Bob Casanova
in talk.origins, posted by "Jenny Brien"
<jenn...@figuk.plus.com>:
>On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 02:18:08 -0000, Robert Carnegie
><rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>> Jenny Brien wrote:
>>> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems
>>> to
>>> be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
>>> diameter of about 2mm. Did it come out of the mine in this form or is it
>>> perhaps an accedental artefact of tne processing? I'm not sure of the
>>> country of origin, probably Poland.
>>
>> Send it to Ed Conrad and he'll make it into a beautiful necklace.
>>
>I might have done, but I got tnis by email from Jak Pajak:
>
><quote>
>I tried to reply on the group, but it appears that my reply would NOT
>go through the cenzorship.
The only "cenzorship" in t.o is a limit of 4 in the
"Newsgroups" field, along with specific bans on crossposts
to a very small number of groups (at their request).
<snip>
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Cory Albrecht
> I might have done, but I got tnis by email from Jak Pajak:
>
> <quote>
> I tried to reply on the group, but it appears that my reply would NOT
> go through the cenzorship. So I am replying on the provate address.
> Here is my reply that around a hour ago I tried to place in the group:
Thank goodness Jan Pajak is to dumb to get around the anti-spam measures
we discussed for how fnording long now?
Earle Jones
"Jenny Brien" <jenn...@figuk.plus.com> wrote:
[...]
>
> Alas, Jan, curiousity got the better of me and I did break it. It looks
> nothing like your description of "onion charcoal" so I must reject that as
> a possible source. It is throughout a conglomerate of tiny spherical
> particles that appear to be coal, not charcoal. At present, my best theory
> is that it may havs formed in the washing, with particles of coal becoming
> round like pebbles in a stream, and then somehow coagulating.
>
> I have no idea how it could have formed naturaiiy pre-extraction, but I am
> open to suggestions.
*
Does it taste like chicken?
earle
*
dlzc
On Dec 10, 5:08 am, "Jenny Brien" <jenni...@figuk.plus.com> wrote:
> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It
> seems to be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest
> of which has a diameter of about 2mm. Did it come out of the
> mine in this form or is it perhaps an accedental artefact of tne
> processing? I'm not sure of the country of origin, probably Poland.
http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE8/Coal.html
Coal is dead plants, primarily. Some structure can survive the
process of forming coal.
David A. Smith
janp...@gmail.com
> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems to
> be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
> diameter of about 2mm.
Probably you have found a piece of "onion-charcoal", which actually is
With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak (Prof. Dr Eng.)
janp...@gmail.com
...
> The only "cenzorship" in t.o is a limit of 4 in the
> "Newsgroups" field, along with specific bans on crossposts
> to a very small number of groups (at their request).
How you can say that you do NOT have censorship in your group, when
the message that appeared only now (i.e. with 2 days delay - and only
because Jenny Brien brought the matter to the light) is NOT the only
my message to your group which was "censored out" by your team?
Actually my messages chronically are stopped from appearing on your
group. For example, only on that day, i.e. 10th of December 2007 as
many as two my messages for your group were stopped and did NOT
appear. Another one of these was a new thread entitled "Evidence
confirms that "natural evolution" has never happened in the animal
kingdom - most ancient creatures are equally perfect as most recent
ones (PDE JP)" which also was stopped from appearing on your group.
You can see this message in other group at which I posted it
simultaneously with your group, but NOT on your group - look at
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.skeptic/browse_thread/thread/794ec56b11262a51#06c27af933d827fd
. The message was intended as an extension to another list of items of
evidence about God's creations, that I posted in the discussion group
of physics (as this other evidence was more from the area of physics)
- see the thread http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/0b85905d2dc9f083#c374dc041f3c5fdf
. It is pity that you censored out that other message as well, as it
actually was a message about origins of humans, and your group is
about origins of humans. (I am almost sure that you actually have
amongst your team one of these "serpents", about which I wrote on
threads http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/f43b7ee2d9d8e837/ecabc492dd893a64#ecabc492dd893a64
and http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_thread/thread/f43b7ee2d9d8e837/ecabc492dd893a64#ecabc492dd893a64
, and it was this particular "serpent" that secretly censored out my
messages).
Anyway, if someone wish to see what I was trying to say in the message
that was censored out from this group, then should look at items #F2
and #F1 of the web page "bible.htm", or at item #B6.3 of the web page
"evolution.htm", which (both web pages) should be available under
addresses:
http://bible.webng.com/bible.htm
http://energy.atspace.org/bible.htm
http://evidence.ueuo.com/bible.htm
http://evil.thefreehost.biz/bible.htm
http://fruit.sitesled.com/bible.htm
http://fruit.xphost.org/bible.htm
http://god.ez-sites.ws/bible.htm
http://karma.freewebpages.org/bible.htm
http://magnocraft.jp.md/bible.htm
http://memorial.awardspace.info/bible.htm
http://newzealand.myfreewebs.net/bible.htm
http://nirvana.scienceontheweb.net/bible.htm
http://pigs.freehyperspace.com/bible.htm
http://parasitism.about.tc/bible.htm
http://parasitism.xphost.org/bible.htm
http://rubik.hits.io/bible.htm
http://tornado.99k.org/bible.htm
http://users3.nofeehost.com/devils/bible.htm
http://wszewilki.greatnow.com/bible.htm
I should also repeat here that each address indicated above has all
the web pages of totalizm. Thus, if someone wishes to view
descriptions from any other web pages of totalizm, then in the above
addresses the name "bible.htm" is just enough to exchange for the name
of the web page that he or she wishes to view, e.g. the web page
"evolution.htm", "god.htm", "text_1_5.htm", "nirvana.htm", "evil.htm",
etc.
Robert Carnegie
So (quitting about a quarter way through) this is a fossilised tomato
plant?
Robert Carnegie
A serious point, though. Should this contributor be silenced by not
knowing about our recently instituted Google users whitelist system?
Or by sending three Venusians with baseball bats to his home? Let's
vote.
dlzc
On Dec 12, 4:30 am, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Dec 11, 10:51 pm,dlzc<dl...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Dec 10, 5:08 am, "Jenny Brien" <jenni...@figuk.plus.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal
> > > bucket. It seems to be an aggregate of near-spherical
> > > pieces, the largest of which has a diameter of about
> > > 2mm. Did it come out of the mine in this form or is it
> > > perhaps an accedental artefact of tne processing? I'm
> > > not sure of the country of origin, probably Poland.
>
> >http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE8/Coal.html
>
> > Coal is dead plants, primarily. Some structure can
> > survive the process of forming coal.
>
> So (quitting about a quarter way through) this is a
> fossilised tomato plant?
Or "mouse" or "cockroach" pellets. Or twigs. Or just the result of
how much and where water was allowed into this biomass during
conversion.
David A. Smith
Jenny Brien
<rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Dec 11, 11:28 pm, Cory Albrecht <coryalbre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Jenny Brien wrote, On 11/12/07 01:06 PM:
>>
>> > I might have done, but I got tnis by email from Jak Pajak:
>>
>> > <quote>
>> > I tried to reply on the group, but it appears that my reply would NOT
>> > go through the cenzorship. So I am replying on the provate address.
>> > Here is my reply that around a hour ago I tried to place in the group:
>>
>> Thank goodness Jan Pajak is to dumb to get around the anti-spam measures
>> we discussed for how fnording long now?
Ir this in force? Jan has been posting from a Gmail address, but I haven't
seen him fnord.
>
> A serious point, though. Should this contributor be silenced by not
> knowing about our recently instituted Google users whitelist system?
> Or by sending three Venusians with baseball bats to his home? Let's
> vote.
>
--
Jenny Brien
That reference is interesting. It appears that coal can form on the
surface. I'd always thought of coal as 'peat under pressure' and the lack
of flattening seemed to rule that out.
Jenny Brien
> How you can say that you do NOT have censorship in your group, when
> the message that appeared only now (i.e. with 2 days delay - and only
> because Jenny Brien brought the matter to the light) is NOT the only
> my message to your group which was "censored out" by your team?
> Actually my messages chronically are stopped from appearing on your
> group. For example, only on that day, i.e. 10th of December 2007 as
> many as two my messages for your group were stopped and did NOT
> appear.
You don't recall that these were some rather unusual traffic conditions as
the time? It wasn't just you, some of my own posts also went astray. Since
none of your posts were time sensitive, what would be the point of
'censoring' them and then publishing them a day or two later?
I quoted your post simply because it seemed so monumentally stupid that I
thought it might be a spoof and I wanted to givn you the chance to disown
it. How in earth could anyone identify my coal as 'onion charcoal' when it
differed so greatly from their own description?
I see now I was wrong.
BTW, since you did not use the magic word, your name must be on the
whitelist of previous posters. So DIG is actively NOT censoring you.
Davej
> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems to
> be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
> diameter of about 2mm. Did it come out of the mine in this form or is it
> perhaps an accedental artefact of tne processing? I'm not sure of the
> country of origin, probably Poland.
Take some photos and then sell it on Ebay. It is worth whatever the
UFO people will pay for it.
Tiny Bulcher
Has Ed C*nr*d ever managed to sell any of his lumps of coal?
David Iain Greig
I am manually augmenting the whitelist, and I am not at home presently,
so people get to wait some hours.
Thos who have a problem with that, such as the good doctor, can go
fuck themselves, and/or find a proper newsfeed, and THEN go fuck
themselves.
--D. 'or the second bit first, same same'
Clothaire
I can't wait for DIG to act, JamPack is in my killlfile.
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by janp...@gmail.com:
>On Dec 10, 4:08 am, "Jenny Brien" <jenni...@figuk.plus.com> wrote:
>> Yesterday I found a strange piece of coal in the coal bucket. It seems to
>> be an aggregate of near-spherical pieces, the largest of which has a
>> diameter of about 2mm.
>Probably you have found a piece of "onion-charcoal", which actually is
>a kind of residue that forms on surfaces of UFO vehicles.
Yeah, that explains it...
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by janp...@gmail.com:
>On Dec 11, 2:59 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> The only "cenzorship" in t.o is a limit of 4 in the
>> "Newsgroups" field, along with specific bans on crossposts
>> to a very small number of groups (at their request).
>How you can say that you do NOT have censorship in your group
Easily. I can say it because it's true; the only
restrictions are those I stated.
<snip rant>
Robert Carnegie
I wouldn't have made an offhand comment if I thought the article that
I gave up on was your writing, but I noticed it was dated 1870. I was
struggling.
(Anyway, didn't they think the /sun/ was made of coal then... that's
another offhand remark, I'm nearly sure that they didn't.)