[geocentrism] Re: Heliocentrism is dead

  • From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:01:12 +1000

That an opinion I am not in agreement with.. It seems to be the other way round 
so far. You all should tak an aptitude test for mechanics. both sides of 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Steven Jones 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 9:25 AM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Heliocentrism is dead

  Regner Trampedach wrote: 
Don't worry, Jack - there wasn't any.
  According to you, yes, but that is what we're here for, to prove one way or 
another. Right now heliocentrism is under-siege and so far you've been unable 
to defend the crumbling hypothesis.




Quoting Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:

  Dear Allen,
What was the clinch - I think I missed it!

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Allen Daves 
  To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 7:15 PM
  Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Heliocentrism is dead

  It means Game point ...we win...:-)

  HC is scientificaly untenable.....

  It means Paul & Regner have converted to GC.....ok well ............we are
still waiting for that......:-o

  Jack Lewis <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Dear Steven,
    What does this posting mean?





  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.33/1132 - Release Date: 15/11/2007 
9:34 AM

Other related posts: