🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <20000207225721.00880.00000153@ng-co1.aol.com>,
  ives100@aol.com (Ives100) wrote:
> >I'm sorry--Could you go back to my website and re-read the
> >text there?
>
> Once was enough-life is too short.

That's what we're trying to teach everybody in prison.

>Look, you want to construct  alternate
> "theories" of the universe?

Nope. I want to construct banana-splits.

> Fine.

Just spit once, that's all.

> Again, keep in mind that modern  science
> demands that your theories account for existing facts.

You're joking! You mean when I've been saying that
theories only arise from existing facts in about 100 posts
I've been agreeing with you?!?! Mamma mia!

> Your  "theories" need to
> make some verifiable predictions that can be observed.

Here's just two: My theory that the universe is an implosion
rather than an explosion demands that the speed of light be
a constant in identical mediums--let's see if it is. And it also
demands that the Hubble constant should be found to be
accelerating (let's see if it is).

> Good by and  good luck.
> Tom Dougherty  (Ives100@aol.com)


Good bye, and I'll need it. "Every time a man tries to show
everybody the obvious he shall get blank stares." That's
what my current theory on human nature predicts, now
let's see if it's so.


S D Rodrian
sdr@t-three.com
http://www.geocities.com/absoluterelativity



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.