(no subject)

  • From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 14:01:06 +0000 (GMT)

Re: Fw: inertia 
Philip M 
re your last post (slightly greyed) 
Several points to clear up here. later.. But if you are correct about both 
sides of the U tube having the same level at the top which I doubt, ( consider 
oil on one side. the less dense oil side will be higher in the tube) but if you 
are correct, then my free energy from gravity model will have to be restored. 
Oil/water in a blind U-tube will certainly have unequal heights. Even with a 
cross connecting tube the same will be true (providing it is situated below the 
level of the oil) because there are other reasons why the oil will not mix with 
the water. However water will mix with colder water.
I hated nanofarads, which came in late 60's or so. I knew what a mic and pic 
were.. why complicate it with a 10 >-9???
Oh! Philip, I do despair. (I do hope you are not guilty of the centimetre 
heresy?). If you don't use nano and all the other SI units, then Engineering 
Notation will not work and that has to be the greatest blow for system and 
order in my lifetime. Well, at least that I've heard about anyway.
You are so negative.. you sounded disappointed if you couldn't find more that 
two points of an hour long video to question.. Of course the ABc has to appear 
impartial, so many people wrote in accusing them that they would not be. 
However lets see how fair they are in the debate that follows. Not that it 
matters global warming buzz word is out.. climate change buzz is now in.. 
global cooling has become the new danger from climate change.. watch it grow! 
Take heart -- it would only take one demonstrated real discrepancy to give 
cause for reflection. I'm looking forward to the '...debate that follows...'.
Paul D

 Yahoo!7 Mail has just got even bigger and better with unlimited storage on all 
webmail accounts.

Other related posts: