Prev: Experiment: Additive Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #172; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: God is not happy
From: Igor on 19 Jun 2010 17:04
On Jun 18, 12:33 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 9:23 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 17, 2:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > How can you be sure range is infinite if the forces are so small that
> > > they are not even immeasurable?
>
> > > How will science verify unlimited range then? Where is its evidence?
> > > Theory suggests that they are limited in time and space.
>
> > > Mitch Reamsch
>
> > the physics of a single eye can extend through out the galaxies
>
> No. We can't see that far with the naked eye!

You can see plenty of galaxies with the naked eye, clueless.

From: BURT on 19 Jun 2010 17:13
On Jun 19, 2:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote:
> On Jun 18, 12:33 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 17, 9:23 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 17, 2:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > How can you be sure range is infinite if the forces are so small that
> > > > they are not even immeasurable?
>
> > > > How will science verify unlimited range then? Where is its evidence?
> > > > Theory suggests that they are limited in time and space.
>
> > > > Mitch Reamsch
>
> > > the physics of a single eye can extend through out the galaxies
>
> > No. We can't see that far with the naked eye!
>
> You can see plenty of galaxies with the naked eye, clueless.

Right but not vary many of them. Not like Andromeda that is close.

Mitch Raemsch
From: J. Clarke on 19 Jun 2010 18:02
On 6/19/2010 5:04 PM, Igor wrote:
> On Jun 18, 12:33 am, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 9:23 pm, GogoJF<jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 17, 2:13 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> How can you be sure range is infinite if the forces are so small that
>>>> they are not even immeasurable?
>>
>>>> How will science verify unlimited range then? Where is its evidence?
>>>> Theory suggests that they are limited in time and space.
>>
>>>> Mitch Reamsch
>>
>>> the physics of a single eye can extend through out the galaxies
>>
>> No. We can't see that far with the naked eye!
>
> You can see plenty of galaxies with the naked eye, clueless.

For certain values of "plenty".


From: zookumar yelubandi on 21 Jun 2010 06:43
Ray Vickson wrote:
> On Jun 17, 1:22 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote:
> > On 6/17/2010 3:07 PM, BURT wrote:
> > > There is no proof until there is measurement. But it is obvious that
> > > strong and electric are limited to the atom.
> Nonsense. Haven't you ever seen a comb pick up a piece of paper after
> it (the comb) has been rubbed in hair? Is a comb bigger than an atom?
> Have you ever seen an electromagnet pick up a car in a junkyard? Is a
> car bigger than an atom?
> R.G. Vickson

A comb is a composite of atoms. Ditto, car. BURT's mind bobs
in the ebony void of space and there appears little hope of recovery
short of extra-terrestial medicines. That being said, your counter
fails to shift his contention one iota.

Uncle Zook


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Experiment: Additive Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #172; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: God is not happy