Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 7, 2007, at 3:47 AM, Helio W. wrote:
My answer to him was, John, when people thought the earth was flat,
they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they
were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is
just as wrong as thinking
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 7:51 AM
To: 'ProFox Email List'
Subject: RE: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 7, 2007, at 3:47 AM, Helio W. wrote:
My answer to him was, John, when people thought the earth was flat,
they were wrong. When people thought the earth
Ramen!
On 5/9/07, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amen!!! And, Baruch Atah Adonai!!!
v/r
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amen!!! And,
Baruch Atah Adonai!!!
Who hear the word of God.
Stephen Russell
DBA / .Net Developer
Memphis TN 38115
901.246-0159
A good way to judge people is by observing how they treat those who
can do them absolutely no good. ---Unknown
On May 7, 2007, at 3:47 AM, Helio W. wrote:
My answer to him was, John, when people thought the earth was flat,
they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they
were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is
just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat,
Isaac Asimov - The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 14 No. 1, Fall 1989
The Relativity of Wrong
pg.. 35-44
http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
I RECEIVED a letter the other day. It was handwritten in crabbed
penmanship so that it was very difficult to read. Nevertheless, I
tried
On Monday 07 May 2007 3:47 am, Helio W. wrote:
Isaac Asimov - The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 14 No. 1, Fall 1989
The Relativity of Wrong
pg.. 35-44
http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
I RECEIVED a letter the other day. It was handwritten in crabbed
penmanship so that
On 5/6/07, Michael Madigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He we are again valuing form over substance.
The finest politician orator in modern times was Adolf
Hitler. The second was Bill Clinton
Not by any stretch of the imagination
1. Churchill
followed closely by Degaulle
If you ever
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Pete Theisen
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 11:46 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] Use of Language, was Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying
Mars Too
On Sunday 06 May 2007 12:03 am, William Sanders / EFG wrote:
Yak.
with a war between Pete
On Sunday 06 May 2007 5:39 am, Jean Laeremans wrote:
On 5/6/07, Michael Madigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He we are again valuing form over substance.
The finest politician orator in modern times was Adolf
Hitler. The second was Bill Clinton
Not by any stretch of the imagination
1.
On 5/6/07, Pete Theisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jean!
I do not doubt your assertion that his content was meaningless. However, the
newsreels that have survived show a very enthusiastic audience reaction.
Ever heard about propaganda ?
Watch some Stalin speeches from the same era
What,
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Friday 04 May 2007 7:02 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
The President has to be a natural born citizen
Meaning he can not come from artificial insemination?
Hi Ricardo!
When the constitution was written this was not a consideration. It means that
he/she has to be
On Saturday 05 May 2007 1:07 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Friday 04 May 2007 7:02 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
The President has to be a natural born citizen
Meaning he can not come from artificial insemination?
Hi Ricardo!
When the constitution was written
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Saturday 05 May 2007 1:07 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Friday 04 May 2007 7:02 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
The President has to be a natural born citizen
Meaning he can not come from artificial insemination?
Hi Ricardo!
When the constitution
Yak.
with a war between Pete and Ricardo -
George W. Bush is literate.
Maybe according to YOUR standards.
Oh yeah, as though the leftist critics are any judge.
--
Regards,
Pete
---
Pete - bless your heart. I know yer a staunch 'R, I used to be one, prior
to GWB becoming the guv o
On Sunday 06 May 2007 12:03 am, William Sanders / EFG wrote:
Yak.
with a war between Pete and Ricardo -
Hi Bill!
Oh, it doesn't rise to war. There are several key issues, R vs D, and I don't
consider GWB's English usage or deficit thereof to be of interest outside of
those who have gotten
He we are again valuing form over substance.
The finest politician orator in modern times was Adolf
Hitler. The second was Bill Clinton
The first was able to persuade, with his oratory
skills, a nation into gassing six million countrymen
and turning them into soap.
The second was able to
Ed,
Yeah, except every reply is more absurd than the previous ones.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Leafe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ProFox Email List profox@leafe.com
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
On May 3, 2007, at 5:59 PM
The funny thing about thinking of yourself as an intellectual or smart
or any such thing is that is simply a form of snobbishness.
We all put our pants on one leg at a time.
I'm not comparing myself to them, but some of the greatest minds in the
world never had more then a grade school or high
You ever hear that ole expression about a person Who can't see the
forest for the trees ?
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 4, 2007, at 10:25 AM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
The funny thing about thinking of yourself as an intellectual or smart
or any such thing is that is simply a form of
Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
By the way, friday down here means bbq, beer and bikini's because its
starting to get hot...
Virg, please don't take this the wrong way, but you're going to look
damn silly in a bikini.
--
Vince Teachout
Caracal Software
www.caracal.net
518-733-9411
That ain't no lie.
Vince Teachout wrote:
Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
By the way, friday down here means bbq, beer and bikini's because its
starting to get hot...
Virg, please don't take this the wrong way, but you're going to look
damn silly in a bikini.
I believe Jerry Cotton labeled him, bright boy. LOL
On May 4, 2007, at 10:25 AM, Virgil Bierschwale
wrote:
The funny thing about thinking of yourself as an
intellectual or smart
or any such thing is that is simply a form of
snobbishness.
Right Wing, Conservative and Republican Gear!
I'm sure only the greats you disagree with.
--- Derek Kalweit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About time you stopped putting your foot in your
mouth...
Whats that saying ?
Ye of closed minds ?
It's saying you're rivaling some of the Profox OT
'greats' at saying
blatantly stupid things.
Not specifically talking about Derek, but there are
some on this list who believe the belief in God is
ignorant. That's a great example of intellectual
snobbery.
--- Virgil Bierschwale
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only because you choose to believe they are stupid.
Open your mind and assume that
We may be mixing terminology, but
Scientists believed the world was flat
Scientists believed the Earth was the center of the
Universe
Scientists believed that the Giant Panda and Gorilla
were both figments of the imagination.
Scientists believed the Coelacanth was extinct
Now scientists
We may be mixing terminology, but
Scientists believed the world was flat
Scientists believed the Earth was the center of the
Universe
Scientists believed that the Giant Panda and Gorilla
were both figments of the imagination.
Scientists believed the Coelacanth was extinct
Now scientists
Yes, you have a grasp on reality. It's Virgil who is
the insulting one. LMAO
--- Ed Leafe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 5:55 PM, Virgil Bierschwale
wrote:
every widely accepted theory has been disproven
once a new and better
theory came into place.
Gravity.
Not specifically talking about Derek, but there are
some on this list who believe the belief in God is
ignorant. That's a great example of intellectual
snobbery.
Many would be quite surprised what I believe regarding God, science,
etc... Not something I share with many people, though...
--
Does anybody have a great suggestion for an office chair.
All the one's i've bought from officemax just plain arent comfortable
for 16 hrs at a time..
can't really afford one of the herman miller aeron's, but I'm definitely
looking for a comfortable office chair that doesnt cut off the
If that doesn't involve shutting down industry while
we wait for a cleaner solution.
Global Warming is all about moving the third-world
into the first-world, not about preventing a global
meltdown.
I agree with you that we should be moving towards
wind, solar and other environmentally-friendly
seems like ya'll were discussing it once in the past, but I was offline
for a few months so I never saw how it turned out..
I know most of the corporations I've worked at, the chairs have been
comfortable all day long.
But the chairs I buy at your typical home office store for around 200
bucks
It's a theory since you can't possibly measure the
gravity on every planet in the universe.
When I was in HS, we learned that there were 3 states
of matter. liquid,solid, and gas. Now since
graduating, they've added plasma to that. And now,
there may even be a 5th state.
Rumour has it that he stole it from the Gay Japanese.
--- Helio W. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Legend has it that Edison was not an inventor, but a
crook who stealed
other people's ideas.
On 5/2/07, Ricardo Aráoz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
Open your brain ed.
When I went to school, it was said that two items of
different mass dropped from an identical height in a
vacuum, would each land at the same time.
I believe I heard that that is no longer valid.
--- Ricardo Aráoz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Helio W. wrote:
Also I meant that gravity is
Do you think Leland knows what invective means? LOL
--- Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
When was the last time you heard someone from New
York use the
term
'intellectual' as an invective?
Only Texans would find that offensive.
snip
Gee,
Wolper
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:29 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
But that it's happening on Mars as well as earth
in nearly
identical temperature shifts over a similar period
of time should
be a clue to you morons who think CO2
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Thursday 03 May 2007 8:38 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
*You*, intellectual as you may be, would be hard pressed to find *any*
Texans who would find offensive what you claim they would.
You mean because they can't read? ;c)
I don't mean that at all. The majority of Texans
Michael Madigan wrote:
Not specifically talking about Derek, but there are
some on this list who believe the belief in God is
ignorant. That's a great example of intellectual
snobbery.
No, Mikey. They just don't believe in god and they think YOU are
ignorant.
--- Virgil Bierschwale
On Friday 04 May 2007 7:02 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
The President has to be a natural born citizen
Meaning he can not come from artificial insemination?
Hi Ricardo!
When the constitution was written this was not a consideration. It means that
he/she has to be born within the United
On 5/3/07, Ed Leafe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is far from settled, though. There is nothing that reliably
explains *how* gravity works, and how it works over such huge distances.
Maybe the CERN experiments planned for november 2007 will shed some
light on this subject.
-9994
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jerry Wolper
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:29 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
But that it's happening on Mars as well as earth in nearly
identical
On May 3, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote:
snip
When was the last time you heard someone from New York use the
term
'intellectual' as an invective?
Only Texans would find that offensive.
snip
Gee, Ed. You are living dangerously ... remember, Leland
Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 9:32 PM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
Actually not. the gravitational force is proportional to the mass of
the objects being measured is a FACT, an observational fact. The why
this happens may be a theory, but it is a FACT that a force
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ricardo Aráoz
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 10:21 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 9:32 PM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote
On Wednesday, May 02, 2007 9:39 PM Ed Leafe wrote:
Force is something that is directly measurable. Gravity is a
theory that attempts to explain that force.
The force is a fact; gravity is a theory that explains the observed
facts very well.
There is the Law of Gravity:
On May 3, 2007, at 8:50 AM, David Crooks wrote:
There is the Law of Gravity:
http://wilstar.com/theories.htm
The Law describes the behavior. The Theory attempts to explain the
behavior.
We can all observe an item being dropped and measure its
acceleration. We can all
Too bad gravity does not have an effect on threads here on this list.
If it did, we could test it by dropping the thread.
I think you are all taking Virgil too literally. Theories come and go.
Many theories are simply highly-educated guesses. The masses (people)
must be comfortable with their
Of Hal Kaplan
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:47 AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: RE: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Too bad gravity does not have an effect on threads here on this list.
If it did, we could test it by dropping the thread.
I think you are all taking Virgil too literally
On 5/3/07, Hal Kaplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Too bad gravity does not have an effect on threads here on this list.
If it did, we could test it by dropping the thread.
I think you are all taking Virgil too literally. Theories come and go.
Many theories are simply highly-educated guesses.
= [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jean Laeremans
=
= Spoken like a true believer...science reduced to a fairy tale
=
= A+
= jml
=
Jean, mon ami, you seem to have chosen the wrong opiate. The side effects are
quite unbecoming. You should try to find one that makes you comfortable
On 5/3/07, Hal Kaplan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jean, mon ami, you seem to have chosen the wrong opiate. The side effects
are quite unbecoming. You should try to find one that makes you comfortable
without being so insecure that you cannot accept a difference of opinion.
B+
HALinNY
Ok
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 3, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote:
Only Texans would find that offensive.
snip
Gee, Ed. You are living dangerously ... remember, Leland reads this
list, too. roflmao
An intellectual would understand that that
Hal Kaplan wrote:
Too bad gravity does not have an effect on threads here on this list.
If it did, we could test it by dropping the thread.
My prediction (not theory) is that it would bounce, if we did.
I think you are all taking Virgil too literally.
That's really the problem.
Ok, now I am officially confused.
What r the differences among theory, law, principle and hypothesis ?
If the theory of Relativity has been proven, why it's not a law ?
E.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/785 -
Eurico Chagas Filho wrote:
Ok, now I am officially confused.
What r the differences among theory, law, principle and hypothesis ?
If the theory of Relativity has been proven, why it's not a law ?
E.
From that website posted earlier (http://wilstar.com/theories.htm) :
The biggest
On 5/3/07, Eurico Chagas Filho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, now I am officially confused.
What r the differences among theory, law, principle and hypothesis ?
If the theory of Relativity has been proven, why it's not a law ?
E.
http://physics.about.com/od/physics101thebasics/a/hypothesis.htm
On May 3, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Eurico Chagas Filho wrote:
What r the differences among theory, law, principle and hypothesis ?
If the theory of Relativity has been proven, why it's not a law ?
Laws can only describe physical events. Explanations can never be
Laws; the pinnacle that any
On Thursday 03 May 2007 7:45 am, Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 3, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote:
snip
When was the last time you heard someone from New York use the
term
'intellectual' as an invective?
Only Texans would find that offensive.
snip
Ed,
You are feeding a troll. You can't win.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Leafe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ProFox Email List profox@leafe.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
On May 2, 2007, at 5:55 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote
On May 3, 2007, at 5:59 PM, Nicholas Geti wrote:
You are feeding a troll. You can't win.
You're probably right, but I guess given the fact that he isn't
normally a troll, he might realize at some point that he was posting
utterly absurd statements.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ricardo Aráoz
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 10:21 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 9:32 PM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
Actually not. the gravitational force is proportional
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Thursday 03 May 2007 7:45 am, Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 3, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote:
snip
When was the last time you heard someone from New York use the
term
'intellectual' as an invective?
Only Texans would find that offensive.
On Thursday 03 May 2007 6:41 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
*You*, intellectual as you may be, would be hard pressed to find *any*
Texans who would find offensive what you claim they would.
You mean because they can't read? ;c)
Hi Ricardo!
I don't mean that at all. The majority of Texans
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Thursday 03 May 2007 6:41 pm, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:
snip
*You*, intellectual as you may be, would be hard pressed to find *any*
Texans who would find offensive what you claim they would.
You mean because they can't read? ;c)
Hi Ricardo!
I don't mean that at all.
On May 3, 2007, at 11:30 AM, Ed Leafe wrote:
No amount of
proof, though, can ever turn a Theory into a Law.
True enough; but Congress can, and that's precisely the concern that
gave birth to this thread in the first place.
:)
- Bob
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
--
Perhaps you simply are uneducated about earth's elliptical orbit
around the sun that becomes, as it were, more or less so based on
where it is in a known cycle?
Perhaps you are just unaware that the sun also follows patterns of
activity that affect the warmth and other features of the
Leland:
Men, upon too many occasions, do not give their own understandings
fair play; but, yielding to some untoward bias, they entangle
themselves in words and confound themselves in subtleties.
-- Federalist Papers #31 )
- Bob
On May 1, 2007, at 2:45 PM,
Officer
Comm (813) 827-9994 DSN 651-9994
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
The lengths to which you
] On
Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:49 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
The rapid warming of earth has been occur over the last 50 or so years,
so it obviously not due to the sun which has been constant in the
radiation
Manager
6th MDG Information System Security Officer
Comm (813) 827-9994 DSN 651-9994
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Helio W.
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 3:04 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Perhaps you simply are uneducated about earth's elliptical orbit
around the sun that becomes, as it were, more or less so based on
where it is in a known cycle?
Perhaps you are just unaware that the sun also follows
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
The lengths to which you are willing to go to maintain your mental
balance by way of denial is astonishing
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars
Too
The lengths to which you are willing to go to
maintain your mental
balance by way of denial is astonishing.
If there is some common cause between the Earth
and Mars that has the
effect of warming our
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars
Too
The lengths to which you are willing to go to
maintain your mental
balance by way of denial is astonishing.
If there is some common cause between the Earth
and Mars that has
Officer
Comm (813) 827-9994 DSN 651-9994
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:45 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 10:48 am, Leland F. Jackson, CPA wrote:
snip
If global warming is a problem within our control, then we should take
steps to prevent it. If global warming is a problem beyond our control,
then it really doesn't matter, but which of you can make this
determination.
Hi
Information System Security Officer
Comm (813) 827-9994 DSN 651-9994
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 9:42 AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Your
. Jackson, CPA
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 9:42 AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Your basing your conclusions on the assumptions of Dr David Whitehouse,
but I base my belief on the vast majority of the Scientific community
that were specifically
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 11:02 am, Wolfe, Stephen S YA-02 6 MDSS/SGSI wrote:
Leland,
No, I'm basing my conclusions on Dr. Lori K. Fenton (PhD in Planetary
Science) who is a Principle Investigator for NASA.
You can find out more about her here:
http://humbabe.arc.nasa.gov/~fenton/
Hi
Although, it seem what is happening to the climate of Mars is
independent of what is happening on Earth, what Dr. Lori K. Fentonshe
learns from studying Mar's climate might hold the key to providing a
solution for Earth.
Regards,
LelandJ
Pete Theisen wrote:
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 11:02
] On
Behalf Of Helio W.
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 3:04 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [OT] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Virgil, what you just said is embarrassing.
On 5/1/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you ever think that its possible that all planets
] George Bush Is Destroying Mars Too
Virgil, what you just said is embarrassing.
On 5/1/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did you ever think that its possible that all planets are gradually
getting closer to the sun, or possibly the sun is gradually warming up
until it burns
On May 2, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
How do we know the sun won't burn itself out next year ?
We don't .!
How do we know that some large planet won't collide with the sun ?
We don't.
These should go along with your we don't know that planets have
gravity quote.
All I'm trying to do is get you to think instead of blindly believing
that you know the answer.
But of course, you do know the answer, don't you grin
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 4:29 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
How do we know the sun won't burn itself out next year ?
We don't
On May 2, 2007, at 4:38 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
All I'm trying to do is get you to think instead of blindly believing
that you know the answer.
It would be a real breakthrough if you were ever able to conceive of
someone knowing something for a reason other than blindly
I don't believe that we have enough history to really truly know something.
We've been here for what ? 500 years or so.
Maybe 1,000 ??
We're just babes in somebodys imagination somewhere.
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 4:38 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
All I'm trying to do is get you
Don't you read the bible?
On 5/2/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't believe that we have enough history to really truly know something.
We've been here for what ? 500 years or so.
Maybe 1,000 ??
We're just babes in somebodys imagination somewhere.
Ed Leafe wrote:
On
On Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:48 PM Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
I don't believe that we have enough history to really truly know something.
We've been here for what ? 500 years or so.
Maybe 1,000 ??
We're just babes in somebodys imagination somewhere.
According to Wikipedia.org:
Archaeological
I never have no.
I've thought about it some..
Let me ask you this.
Have you ever watched men sit around a campfire at night swapping lies.
Have you ever noticed how the lies get bigger every generation ?
How do you know that the things handed down in the bible, which by my
understanding has
On May 2, 2007, at 4:55 PM, David Crooks wrote:
Archaeological evidence suggests
Ah, that old evidence ploy. According to Virgil, this is just
another word for blindly believing, since he cannot conceive of
anything more involved than that.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
--
Open your brain ed.
you're an intelligent man.
The man that invented the lightbulb failed a 1,000 times is what I read.
Each time, he had a different theory.
Each theory turned out to be wrong until he got it right.
History proved his theory right, not his theory.
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2,
On May 2, 2007, at 5:06 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
Each time, he had a different theory.
Each theory turned out to be wrong until he got it right.
You confuse 'theory' with 'guess'.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
There is no difference
Ed Leafe wrote:
On May 2, 2007, at 5:06 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
Each time, he had a different theory.
Each theory turned out to be wrong until he got it right.
You confuse 'theory' with 'guess'.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
--
On May 2, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Virgil Bierschwale wrote:
There is no difference
And therein lies your problem.
Ignorance is not something to be proud of, even in Texas.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
___
Post
On 5/2/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no difference
About time you stopped putting your foot in your mouth...
A+
jml
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
Explain the difference.
As you said, ignorance is not something to be proud of, even in New York
City
See, the difference between us is that I know that I do not know
everything and I've learned over the years not to believe things because
somebody says it is so.
How many theories do you know
Whats that saying ?
Ye of closed minds ?
Jean Laeremans wrote:
On 5/2/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no difference
About time you stopped putting your foot in your mouth...
A+
jml
[excessive quoting removed by server]
Virgil,
The computer you're using was built on some of the theories you
probably think are false... Beware, if somebody prove them wrong, your
computer will suddently stop working...
On 5/2/07, Virgil Bierschwale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whats that saying ?
Ye of closed minds ?
Jean
About time you stopped putting your foot in your mouth...
Whats that saying ?
Ye of closed minds ?
It's saying you're rivaling some of the Profox OT 'greats' at saying
blatantly stupid things. :-)
--
Derek
___
Post Messages to:
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
