[geocentrism] Re: APOLOGY to all and Regna/Neville.

  • From: Regner Trampedach <art@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:27:57 +1000

philip madsen wrote:
I haven't even replied to Sungenis' post, and you almost declare
Geocentrism a winner - Hold your horses, Philip.

     - Regner

No Regner I had not given up on you that easily.
Thanks :-)
But I had thought we might have given you much more to consider than you had bargained for..
By no means.
yet I have observed mistakes (by all protagonists over the years) on both sides of this question. (deep down I believe its a mystery only God can explain.)
 
Re engineering!  I am convinced engineering came before science. Someone made a boat..  science had to figure out why it floated before the Priests used it as proof in the power of God..  (grin) 
True - but before science, engineering would have been based only on trial and error.
And a few hundred years ago engineering, astrology, astronomy, chemistry, alchemy,
physics, etc., was all mixed together - now we know the differences (I hope).
 
Perhaps my bad experience, was yes in Australia. I have observed professors in action, and yes they aint like Julius Sumner Millar. If you disagree with the "blackboard", they fail you. This is the modern American influence, and I do not have any reason to ascribe it to European countries or people like yourself. After all, you ozonate your drinking water and do not drink chlorine.
...or flouride...
 
Looking forward to your answers, and I let the horses loose years ago.
 
Should be in your in-box. I'll keep an eye out for your horses...

    - Regner

Philip.. 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 1:30 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: APOLOGY to all and Regna/Neville.

Sorry I have been absent for so long - it was entirely unrelated to this forum.
Also I have not been able to keep up with the avalanche of posts since April 3rd,
so my apologies if I have missed something important - Pointing out a post I
should have read, would be considered helpful...

philip madsen wrote:
Thanks Bernie, and my apologies to Regner..
Thanks - and no worries.
Philip, you do however, have a very strange picture of how science is taught
at universities - might it be from your own experience in engineering school?
Engineers apply the science found by scientists, so the way scientists and
engineers are taught, should obviously be quite different.
  I haven't even replied to Sungenis' post, and you almost declare
Geocentrism a winner - Hold your horses, Philip.

     - Regner

 
Phlip.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2008 12:06 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: APOLOGY to all and Regna/Neville.

Should be Regner, not Regna:
 
: ~ )
 
Bernie

philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This was quick not vetted and after my happy 4 hours..  hope it is coherent.. 
 
I feel bad about dominating the list with my debate with Allen.  As my inbox fills each day it occured to me that others are distracted and discouraged from inputting.
 
I am sorry .  I do not want to use this list to blow my own trumpet. And sometimes it seems that this is what I do.. 
 
Especially to me when my posts come back and I scrutinise them for errors. I do that in advance, but it amazes me the number I miss.
 
Neville I am worried that you are so quiet. I very much value your inputs, no matter how wild they are.  I like wild.   That in scientific terminology is called lateral thinking.. If Edison and Tesla! didn't think laterally, we wouldn't have the light bulb or any real trnsmission of electrical power as we have today.  (From our souls point of view , that might have been a good thing)
 
Regna this might sound cruel, and believe me I do not intend cruelty, as I admire your patience and effort that you have put into explainig the cosmos from your viewpoint, and the discussions relating to geocentrism; but if you follow your indoctrination, you are not a lateral thinker such as were these mental giants , but a follower of concensus.
 
They were not followers and I hope niether am I . This does not mean denying the principles scientific concensus established. It means looking for loopholes and alternate ways or being open to those who do. 
 
Ignoring Lateral thinking  puts you in the same category as all those who would not accept Edison, or Tesla back then, in todays world, against any alternative.  Not forgetting that in their separate fields Edison with DC opposed the AC of Tesla.
 
That is my point. Truth will out by lateral thinking, fair competition, and no power of concensus.
 
That you have joined this group, if your motives were to promote truth and a willingness to examine alternatives to your indoctrination, I am your best friend here. ..Well almost maybe.
 
You have yet to come back in answer to our most logical rejection of your fragile support of a Null result of the MM experiments..  This indeed requires an open lateral thinking mind.
 
Philip.,

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.12/1372 - Release Date: 10/04/2008 5:36 PM


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.13/1375 - Release Date: 12/04/2008 11:32 AM

Other related posts: