Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI
SpaceKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Space Forum / Astronomy / December 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Can the electron create its own barycenter?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
BradGuth - 04 Nov 2008 07:37 GMT
The strong electrostatic tidal radius, as a force that's holding onto
an electron, seems to far exceed the conventional mainstream
interpretation as to the gravitational binding force of attraction.

The electromagnetic force is simply far greater than any gravitational
force, and perhaps somewhere in between is the electrostatic force of
attraction that's only limited by the voltage differential, of which
seems nearly unlimited.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
"The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other
fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an
electron and proton 1 meter apart is approximately 1e-67 newton, while
the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is
approximately 1e-28 newton. Both these forces are weak when compared
with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the
electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude
(i.e. 1e39) greater than the force of gravity -- roughly the same ratio
as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram mass."

What if the velocity of the gravity unit/graviton were exactly twice
that of 'c'?

If there's no self generated barycenter created at the atomic or any
other level, then for example, what is the electrostatic binding force
that's existing between Earth and our Selene/moon?

The naked Selene/moon is after all acting a bit like Earth's electron,
though getting continually hit (each and every cm2) with cosmic energy
of 1e12 ~ 1e21 eV, and there's no question that such cosmic energy
that's directly interacting with such a naked anticathode and thus
fully reactive Selene/moon would not have subsequently electrostatic
charged this orb, as well as having unavoidably released secondary/
recoil gamma plus having produced X-rays in the process.

Why would our Selene/moon not have an electrostatic charge, that's of
a different and/or of even opposite polarity in respect to Earth?

Of further consideration;  Why would our physically dark and otherwise
naked Selene/moon not be as bad or worse off than any Van Allan
magnetosphere badlands?

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / "Guth Usenet"
Hagar - 04 Nov 2008 15:07 GMT
The answer is: NO
BradGuth - 04 Nov 2008 16:14 GMT
> The answer is: NO

Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?

Gravitational Constant = 6.673e-11 or 6.6743e-11 or 6.693e-11
(conditional physics, as need be modified in order to make the
gravitational force of attraction between Earth and our Selene/moon or
that of any other orbital mechanics equal to the centripetal force).

It’s a little odd that so many variations of this Gravitational
Constant seem to exist, especially when such would need far better
accuracy when  dealing with orbiting asteroids or the likes of our
Selene/moon.  No wonder India has been taking it nice and easy with
their Selene/moon mission.

CHANDRAYAAN - 1
http://www.isro.org/index.htm

~ BG
Hagar - 04 Nov 2008 18:13 GMT
You're having those bad dreams again, GuthBall.
Take your meds, they will make you better.
Or not ...

On Nov 4, 7:07 am, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d367530d-1df3-4e77-a7cc-04a1da78da46@s1g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> The answer is: NO

Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?

Gravitational Constant = 6.673e-11 or 6.6743e-11 or 6.693e-11
(conditional physics, as need be modified in order to make the
gravitational force of attraction between Earth and our Selene/moon or
that of any other orbital mechanics equal to the centripetal force).

It’s a little odd that so many variations of this Gravitational
Constant seem to exist, especially when such would need far better
accuracy when  dealing with orbiting asteroids or the likes of our
Selene/moon.  No wonder India has been taking it nice and easy with
their Selene/moon mission.

CHANDRAYAAN - 1
http://www.isro.org/index.htm

~ BG
www.freedomtofascism.com < - 05 Nov 2008 00:11 GMT
>I am a dumbass.

When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?

Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
Saul Levy - 05 Nov 2008 00:29 GMT
Talk to your a.s, AssAlexa!  lmfjao!

It will understand you!

Saul Levy

>>I am a dumbass.
>
>When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
>Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:30 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:31 GMT
>>I am a dumbass.
>
> When will you CIA trolls stop trolling usenet for physics information?
>
> Why don't you go ask the IMF, eh?
BradGuth - 06 Nov 2008 09:51 GMT
> You're having those bad dreams again, GuthBall.
> Take your meds, they will make you better.
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
>  ~ BG

Since the atomic gravity force within the atom is so weak, seems the
electron barycenter has to exist, unless the electrostatic force of
attraction is taking most of the credit.

If you're so smart, then show off by sharing your expertise as to
what's keeping atoms alive and kicking, and without their zooming
apart.

~ BG
Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D. - 04 Nov 2008 22:07 GMT
> > "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:d367530d-1df3-4e77-a7cc-04a1da78da46@s1g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

OK, let's all just CALM DOWN for a moment now, shall we?  This whole
thing started when someone asked if 'lectrons could create their own
BaryCenters(tm) an' sh*t.

I wasn't compleatly sure so I looked it up on The 'Net.

I mean, I didn't know for TOTALLY sure what a Barry Center was at
first.  It could have been a miniature Shopping Center like one of
those WalMart Shopping Centers that was either based upon the
original, seminal vibrational frequencies of either Senator Barry
Goldwater (if it was a Republican Shopping Center) or maybe Barry
White Shopping Center (if it was either in South-Central L.A. or
Compton or something, *OR* if it was really seductive and all the
InterComs at the Shopping Center had super-low voices and stuff.)

Oh yeah, PLUS Barry White is really a Negro!

I am telling you THE TRUTH HEAR!!!

But anyways, here's part of what the Computer said:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Barycentric Subdivision of a Convex Polytope
=================================
Another way of defining the BCS of a simplex S is to associate each
part to a sequence  of faces of S, with increasing dimensions, such
that Fi is a facet of Fi + 1, for i from 0 to n - 1. Then each vertex
vi of the corresponding piece is the barycenter of face Fi.

This alternative definition can be extended to the BCS of an arbitrary
n-dimensional convex polytope into a number of n-simplices. Thus the
BCS of a pentagon P, for example, has 10 triangles: each triangle is
associated to three elements F0,F1,F2 of P -- respectively, a corner of
P, a side of P incident to that corner, and P itself.

Similarly the BCS of a cube consists of 48 tetrahedra, each of them
associated to a sequence F0,F1,F2,F3 of nested elements -- a vertex, an
edge, a face, and the whole cube. Note that there are 8 choices for
F0, 3 for F1 (given F0), and 2 for F2 (given F0,F1).
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Now, I'll grant you that Computers are VERY smart (c'mon, now, we ALL
know that already!) but maybe they just don't get out much or
something because I'll tell you what I've been out with Polly Tope
more than a couple times and she's a LOT of fun in bed but let's face
it far from being Complex (like the Computer just said) she's ...
ummm ... well, she's not really all that bright but that's OK, really,
because if you've ever gotten naked with her and laid her out on her
tummy and dumped a whole bunch of baby oil all over her superfine legs
and *ss then just hopped on bored and did some serious GRINDING before
finally slidin' it on in there then you'd KNOW what I mean!

TOTALLY!

And when it comes to choosing which Port of Entry, she just looks back
at you with those "Just DO Me!" eyes and whispers in that sultry voice
of hers, "It's all good..."

OK, so we've already DEBUNKED the whole "Barry Center" Modern Urban
Myth, let's take a look at the rest of this OBVIOUS Guvmint Disinfo,
shall we?

Can those clever li'l 'lectrons actually create their OWN Deep-Voiced
Negro Republican Shopping Centers?

YOUV'E GOT TO BE KIDDING ME HEAR!!!!!

Let's just look at the FACTS for a minute, OK?

In the FIRST place, a 'lectron is like a single-celled amoeba.  Plus
it's SO TINY there's not even enough ROOM for any brains inside it's
shell!!  That's why thay made the Haldol-Collider!  So when they spun
'em REAL FAST and bonked 'em together to bust 'em open, they saw there
were NO BRAINS AT ALL inside ... just a bunch of worthless sub-atomic
particles and sh*t.

In the SECOND place, do you have ANY IDEA how complex it is to build
an entire Shopping Center?  Do you know how many DIFFERENT trades have
to work together to get 'er done?  'Lectrons don't even have ANY IDEA
how to do even ONE single trade, let alone all the different trades
you'd need LICENSED CONTRACTORS (like Bob Lazar over at Area 51-50!)
to fully MASTER before they could ever actually complete a
construction project of that magnitude.

I mean, lets" face-it here ... I don't want to sound judgemental or
mean or anything but those li'l 'lectrons are only good at ONE SINGEL
THING(!) and thats' spinning around their favorite nucleas VERY VERY
FAST!

And they do a PRETTY DAMN GOOD job of it so long as Stephen Hawking is
not trying to make them spin around even faster and go around bonking
into each other and stuff!

But there's STILL just NO WAY in h*ll that they could even POSSABLY be
able to build Shopping Centers!  Plus, thay'd NEVER pass inspection
and stuff, anyways!

I mean, just who are you trying to FOOL here, eh buster?

OK.  Here's the final "nale in your cofin," d00d!

You said:
> Gravitational Constant = 6.673e-11 or 6.6743e-11 or 6.693e-11

What a bunch of unmittagated CRAPOLA!

First off, you accidentally MIXED UP some LETTERS into your NUMBERS,
dude!

I mean, what the h*ll kind of a number is 6.6743e-11?!

Why didn't you just use The Pythagorean Theorem or The Theory of
Relativity or whatever to round UP 6.6743e [sic.] to an even 7.0 or
just plane 7 (seven) then DROP the damn "e" (which has NO BUSINESS
being mixed up in all those damn numbers anyways!) THEN you can
finally DO THE MATH:

  6.6743e - 11
= 7.0 + "e" - 11
= 7 - 11
= -4

NOW do you see why SCIENCE is SO IMPORTANT?!  Without it, we'd be
stuck following imbasills like you around EVERYWHERE like a bunch of
lemmings on a MISSION or something!!!

And finely, in conclusion, your to late with all of this
"Gravitational Constant" crap because everyone already knows that THE
ONLY CONSTANT IS CHANGE.  Don't believe me, though, check it out for
youreself:

Schrödinger's Cat
=============
Schrödinger's cat is a famous illustration of the principle in quantum
theory of superposition , proposed by Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.
Schrödinger's cat serves to demonstrate the apparent conflict between
what quantum theory tells us is true about the nature and behavior of
matter on the microscopic level and what we observe to be true about
the nature and behavior of matter on the macroscopic level.  [ cf:
http://www.tomandjerryonline.com/ ]

Hope all this helps!

-Dr. Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D.
http://www.bleujefe.com/BB/
www.freedomtofascism.com < - 04 Nov 2008 23:49 GMT
>OK, let's all just CALM DOWN for a moment now, shall we?

SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES!

Mystery Space Machines - Pt 18
Rense.com World Exclusive
By Jeff Rense
11-2-8

All images and videotape footage ©2008 by John Lenard Walson. All Rights
Reserved. Copying or Reproduction in any media are prohibited without
written permission of Rense.com and John Lenard Walson. All text is ©2008
Rense.com. Links are encouraged.
 
Welcome to another round trip into near space...courtesy of John Walson's
extraordinary skills with his modified telescope and HD video camcorder.  
 
Looking back over the first 17 Parts of this rense.com world exclusive
series at many of these strange large objects...machines...that are in orbit
above the Northern Hemisphere, it seems reasonable to deduct that most are
probably not your friendly AT&T telecom satellites. In fact, many - some say
most - of today's satellites are clearly military and 'civilian'
surveillance machines, which have as their primary roles the destruction of
our privacy and to play key roles in the killing of human beings.  
 
Beyond this, we can also ask the legitimate question: are all of Walson's
images showing spacecraft of *human* origin?  The answer is no, not
necessarily.  Looking at the sizes and configurations of these machines, it
is a reasonable speculation that they may be space ships or space vehicles.
We know what Pentagon hacker Gary McKinnon found...and that shocking data
may end up costing him his life.
 
Take a look at the first machine below.  Does this look like any 'satellite'
you've seen before?
 
Look closely at the details...

Continued:
http://www.rense.com/general83/myst18.htm
BradGuth - 05 Nov 2008 05:41 GMT
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:07:38 -0800 (PST), "Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D."
>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> Continued:http://www.rense.com/general83/myst18.htm

Interesting images and video: "Mystery Space Machines - Pt 18"

Looks very ETI.

~ BG
Saul Levy - 05 Nov 2008 10:10 GMT
It just looks VERY FUZZY to me, GoofBall!  lmfjao!

The same as all the rest of them.

Saul Levy

>Interesting images and video: "Mystery Space Machines - Pt 18"
>
>Looks very ETI.
>
> ~ BG
www.freedomtofascism.com < - 05 Nov 2008 11:55 GMT
>> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:07:38 -0800 (PST), "Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D."
>>
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
>
>Looks very ETI.

They're everywhere.  Run for your life.

:)
BradGuth - 06 Nov 2008 02:14 GMT
> >On Nov 4, 3:49 pm,www.freedomtofascism.com<<tr...@r.us>> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 14:07:38 -0800 (PST), "Blue Resonant Human, Ph.D."
[quoted text clipped - 46 lines]
>
> :)

Why would such ETs bother little old me?  What did I ever do to them?

~ BG
Saul Levy - 06 Nov 2008 05:34 GMT
The Borg want your SKULL, BradBoi!  lmfjao!

For experiments on installing a BRAIN!  Makes it simple for them:
Your skull is EMPTY!

Saul Levy

>Why would such ETs bother little old me?  What did I ever do to them?
>
> ~ BG
www.freedomtofascism.com < - 05 Nov 2008 00:05 GMT
>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?

When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:28 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:29 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com < - 05 Nov 2008 00:07 GMT
>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?

When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 Nov 2008 14:27 GMT
>>Is that a subjective "NO", or and objective "NO"?
>
> When will you Langley boys stop trolling usenet for physics information?
www.freedomtofascism.com - 07 N