Fat cells found in “presolar” meteorite

On Jul 13, 5:54Â*pm, Wretch Fossil wrote:
On 7月13日, 下�4時27分, Wretch Fossil wrote:

Fatcellsfoundin “presolar�meteorite

Dr. Dan Richman discovered lipids inmeteoriteMurchison as shown in
Fig. 8 athttp://astrobiology.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/2011-2-2-prebi...

However, the lipids are in fact fossilizedfatcellsas labeled at
Fig. 1:http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?...77259053&p=226

Whitefatcells(adipocytes) contain a single lipid droplet surrounded
by cytoplasm, as shown in these images:
Fig. 2:http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?...77267355&p=227
Image source and credit for Fig. 2:http://jcem.endojournals.org/content...expansion.html

http://tanyapeale.com/blog1/wp-conte...adipocyte1.gif

Fatcellsdiffer from red bloodcellsin thatfatcellscan have
different sizes in an animal while red bloodcellshave same size in
an animal.

Geological vesicles show no concentric circles, especially the central
dark circle marked with green line in Fig. 1 above.

Added on July 13, 2011:
Lipid droplets have no membranes.

The following images show lipid droplets have no membranes no matter
they exist in a fat cell or not:http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/76211/enlarge

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/316590/enlarge

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/311662/enlarge

The kelleher said:

"You poor things,being off by close to 4 rotations across 4 orbital
circuits is quite a feat as all it takes is basic arithmetic to count
the 1461 days and rotations that make up 4 years and 4 orbital
circuits,daily and orbital motions are separate so that when viewed
from the standpoint of 24 hour rotations and days,Feb 29th as another
day and rotation accounts for the orbital drift that occurs through
Mar 1st every non leap year.

No point in going into further details such as the 11 minute orbital
discrepancy which separates 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes from the
idealized calendar format of 365 1/4 rotations when you have a
mindnumbing 366 1/4 rotations as a balance for 1 orbital circuit.On a
scale of 1 to 10,this Ra/Dec driven error is unlike anything seen
before and is simply 10 on a catastrophic scale for trying to squeeze
1465 rotations into 4 orbital circuits despite having cause and effect
before readers in terms of the 1461 day/night cycles and subsequently
the 1461 times the temperature fluctuates across 4 years telling
readers that the balance is 365 1/4 rotations per circuit.

You have these guys trying their level best to make something out of a
'leap second' tied to daily rotation while forgetting or not knowing
what the Feb 29th leap day correction does in restoring the
proportional balance between the number of rotations in a year/orbital
circuit and this macro view the current fad look catastrophically
dumb,not bad,not poor,sheer and utter intellectual desolation.

Do you want to explain what Feb 29th does while adhering to 1465
rotations for 4 orbital circuits then good luck to you,you can always
step back,look at the bigger picture and come to the only possible
conclusion as a person who prides their intelligence."

And Hanson said:


.... precisely, "Chris.B", my friend. Thank you! You
are the best ever mule to come
back & ask for encore #43, because Chris has wisely
recognized the need to publicize these essential but
little known facts about Einstein & his Relativity work, in
http://tinyurl.com/Crackpot-Einsteins-Crock
wherein it says:

-- "Chris.B" ( SEE end of post ) wrote:
--- KW, Koobee Wublee wrote:
---- Jan Panteltje wrote:
----- "hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:

Einstein, in his own words, just a year before he
folded his relativity tent, closed his umbrella, kicked
the bucket and finally puffed and bit the grass,....
Einstein wrote, in 1954, to his Italian friend Besso:

|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, [my] gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein

So, that then is the end of Einstein's infamous fantasy
career-journey which concludes, long last, with what
most enlightened folks have suspected for a long time,
if not outright from the start, that:
====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ======
===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ====

Einstein flagellated himself & came clean (1), after
he was used by the Zios for their own, to them then
noble political agenda. (2)
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein (1)
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2 (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity (2)
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR (2)

GR/SR is a useless crock o'****, save it being
"a Base", an "al Qaida", for Einstein Dingleberries
to worship Albert's sphincter.. although AE said
not to do that.

Professor Panteltje wrote:

I do get a bit sick of the 'Einstein was right again crowd'.
He was not, he was just a math fiddler, curve fitter.
If somebody asks: How much is 2 + 3, and Einstein
would have answered : 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.
Then saying: "see, he once did say 5, he was right again",
is really really bad.
He had no clue, and died without one.
That he was pushed by the US at that time as a great
scientist to brush up the Jewish image was also a mistake,
as he did not have that clue, and just jammed science
with his curve fitting replacing simple physics understanding.

KW wrote:

Please allow Yours Truly to remind everyone whether if he/she is a
true scholar of physics or another Orwellian-ill-educated Einstein
Dingleberry that fall in the following ridiculous traits:

** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS

Newton discovered the law of gravity in which if the gravitating mass
is positive, gravitational force is attractive. The reverse, although
never been observed, must be true. That is if the gravitating mass is
negative, the gravitational effect must be repulsive or antigravity.
shrug

Later on, it was discovered by Poisson that the gradient of the
Newtonian gravitational potential is equivalent to the mass density.
In free space, this mass density [rho] is zero.

hanson wrote:

Revisiting an earlier discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
Newton in his 2 or 3rd Principia edition, 300 years
before Einstein, addresses Gravitation as
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2.
Einstein was to lazy or stupid to incorporate
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2 into his GR croc. Or maybe
Albert was still scared from his 1907 confession
and apology for him having stolen E-mc^2.
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft

Despite all that, like brainwashed addicted cultists,
current day Dingleberries still worship Einstein's
sphincter, full well knowing that for the last 70 years,
experiments show Newtonian's gravitation also to be:
G = H^2/rho
wherein H is the Hubble constent and rho is the
mas-density (even on cosmic scales), (some
small digits & pi omitted here) all of which can
be concatenated into the skeletal 1234 cosmic
envelope as
c = (GM/R)^1/2 = (GMH)^1/3 = (GM*b_r)^1/4
IOW, none of Einstein's convoluted **** has
any use in the here and real universe that we
live in. .... KW is correct in his assessment.

KW continued & wrote:

However, it does not take a genius to figure out if the
mass density is negative, gravitational effect becomes
repulsive. Poisson was the very first person to suggest
antigravity but knew better not to. Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar was just so ****ing ignorant that this
nitwit, this plagiarist, and the liar had no hesitation to claim
negative mass density in vacuum in which the giants before this
nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar knew better not to go there.
shrug
Now, the self-styled physicists are getting hard-ons whenever Dark
Energy (negative mass density in vacuum) is mentioned. What the ****
does negative mass mean? The only plausible answer is ignorance.
After all, they are still worshipping Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar as a god. Anything this nitwit, the
plagiarist, and this liar uttered just bedazzaled the hell out of
these self-styled physicists. That is called Dingleberry
worshipping. shrug
Moving on to GR, the silliness embraced by the self-styled physicists
exponentially amplifies. The Schwarzschild metric was discovered by
Hilbert not Schwarzschild. Both metrics are mathematically legal
solutions to the field equations that are static, spherically
symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild's original solution
does not allow for the existence of black holes. Let's look at the
Schwarzschild metric before the integrating constant is identified
through the boundary requirement of satisfying the Newtonian law of
gravity. There are more integration constants, but for the purpose of
this discussion, they are ignored.

** ds^2 = c^2 (1 + K / r) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 + K / r) - r^2 dO^2
Where
** K = One of the many integration constants
** dO^2 = cos^2(Latitude) dLongitude^2 + dLatitude^2

Notice this particular solution predicts just about everything from
gravitation to antigravity. There is no definitive reasoning to pin-
point this particular integration constant as the following besides
through this boundary condition that emphasizes hind sights are
always 20/20. shrug

** K = - 2 G M / c^2, Newtonian compatibility requirement

This point collaborates with Professor Ponte's astute observation of
how Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar reasoned.
shrug

Chris.B" wrote:

I fully agree with what KW, JP & hanson said above.
I adore and revere Koobee Wublee, Jan Panteltje and hanson
I am honored to be on the poster list as an appendage..
I have requested them to repost his note every time
I do respond to it. I need to see this post every day.
It makes me feel being intelligent and smart like they are.
I don't know any arithmetic nor algebra at all.
My personal negativity which I have posted about in my
google group profile forces me to be like this. Here is
my passport-http://tinyurl.com/Picture-of-Chris-B

No I didn't. I was misquoted.

"Chris.B" wrote about a Wretch
Fossil and Fat cells found
in "Fat Gerald", The kelleher, which are snipped since
my friend, "Chris.B", does remain my best ever mule
to come back & ask for encore #45, because Chris has
wisely recognized the need to publicize these essential
but little known facts about Einstein & his Relativity work,
in http://tinyurl.com/Crackpot-Einsteins-Crock
wherein it says:

-- "Chris.B" ( SEE end of post ) wrote:
--- KW, Koobee Wublee wrote:
---- Jan Panteltje wrote:
----- "hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:
Einstein, in his own words, just a year before he
folded his relativity tent, closed his umbrella, kicked
the bucket and finally puffed and bit the grass,....
Einstein wrote, in 1954, to his Italian friend Besso:

|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, [my] gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein

So, that then is the end of Einstein's infamous fantasy
career-journey which concludes, long last, with what
most enlightened folks have suspected for a long time,
if not outright from the start, that:
====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ======
===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ====

Einstein flagellated himself & came clean (1), after
he was used by the Zios for their own, to them then
noble political agenda. (2)
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein (1)
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2 (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity (2)
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR (2)

GR/SR is a useless crock o'****, save it being
"a Base", an "al Qaida", for Einstein Dingleberries
to worship Albert's sphincter.. although AE said
not to do that.

Professor Panteltje wrote:

I do get a bit sick of the 'Einstein was right again crowd'.
He was not, he was just a math fiddler, curve fitter.
If somebody asks: How much is 2 + 3, and Einstein
would have answered : 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.
Then saying: "see, he once did say 5, he was right again",
is really really bad.
He had no clue, and died without one.
That he was pushed by the US at that time as a great
scientist to brush up the Jewish image was also a mistake,
as he did not have that clue, and just jammed science
with his curve fitting replacing simple physics understanding.

KW wrote:
Please allow Yours Truly to remind everyone whether if he/she is a
true scholar of physics or another Orwellian-ill-educated Einstein
Dingleberry that fall in the following ridiculous traits:

** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS

Newton discovered the law of gravity in which if the gravitating mass
is positive, gravitational force is attractive. The reverse, although
never been observed, must be true. That is if the gravitating mass is
negative, the gravitational effect must be repulsive or antigravity.
shrug

Later on, it was discovered by Poisson that the gradient of the
Newtonian gravitational potential is equivalent to the mass density.
In free space, this mass density [rho] is zero.

hanson wrote:
Revisiting an earlier discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
Newton in his 2 or 3rd Principia edition, 300 years
before Einstein, addresses Gravitation as
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2.
Einstein was to lazy or stupid to incorporate
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2 into his GR croc. Or maybe
Albert was still scared from his 1907 confession
and apology for him having stolen E-mc^2.
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft

Despite all that, like brainwashed addicted cultists,
current day Dingleberries still worship Einstein's
sphincter, full well knowing that for the last 70 years,
experiments show Newtonian's gravitation also to be:
G = H^2/rho
wherein H is the Hubble constent and rho is the
mas-density (even on cosmic scales), (some
small digits & pi omitted here) all of which can
be concatenated into the skeletal 1234 cosmic
envelope as
c = (GM/R)^1/2 = (GMH)^1/3 = (GM*b_r)^1/4
IOW, none of Einstein's convoluted **** has
any use in the here and real universe that we
live in. .... KW is correct in his assessment.

KW continued & wrote:
However, it does not take a genius to figure out if the
mass density is negative, gravitational effect becomes
repulsive. Poisson was the very first person to suggest
antigravity but knew better not to. Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar was just so ****ing ignorant that this
nitwit, this plagiarist, and the liar had no hesitation to claim
negative mass density in vacuum in which the giants before this
nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar knew better not to go there.
shrug
Now, the self-styled physicists are getting hard-ons whenever Dark
Energy (negative mass density in vacuum) is mentioned. What the ****
does negative mass mean? The only plausible answer is ignorance.
After all, they are still worshipping Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar as a god. Anything this nitwit, the
plagiarist, and this liar uttered just bedazzaled the hell out of
these self-styled physicists. That is called Dingleberry
worshipping. shrug
Moving on to GR, the silliness embraced by the self-styled physicists
exponentially amplifies. The Schwarzschild metric was discovered by
Hilbert not Schwarzschild. Both metrics are mathematically legal
solutions to the field equations that are static, spherically
symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild's original solution
does not allow for the existence of black holes. Let's look at the
Schwarzschild metric before the integrating constant is identified
through the boundary requirement of satisfying the Newtonian law of
gravity. There are more integration constants, but for the purpose of
this discussion, they are ignored.

** ds^2 = c^2 (1 + K / r) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 + K / r) - r^2 dO^2
Where
** K = One of the many integration constants
** dO^2 = cos^2(Latitude) dLongitude^2 + dLatitude^2

Notice this particular solution predicts just about everything from
gravitation to antigravity. There is no definitive reasoning to pin-
point this particular integration constant as the following besides
through this boundary condition that emphasizes hind sights are
always 20/20. shrug

** K = - 2 G M / c^2, Newtonian compatibility requirement

This point collaborates with Professor Ponte's astute observation of
how Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar reasoned.
shrug

Chris.B" wrote:
I fully agree with what KW, JP & hanson said above.
I adore and revere Koobee Wublee, Jan Panteltje and hanson
I am honored to be on the poster list as an appendage..
I have requested them to repost his note every time
I do respond to it. I need to see this post every day.
It makes me feel being intelligent and smart like they are.
I don't know any arithmetic nor algebra at all.
My personal negativity which I have posted about in my
google group profile forces me to be like this. Here is
my passport-http://tinyurl.com/Picture-of-Chris-B

On Jul 14, 8:41*pm, "hanson" wrote:
snip

Lies, damned lies and Hanson.

And now a message to Hanson from kelleher:

kelleher said:

"You poor things,being off by close to 4 rotations across 4 orbital
circuits is quite a feat as all it takes is basic arithmetic to count
the 1461 days and rotations that make up 4 years and 4 orbital
circuits,daily and orbital motions are separate so that when viewed
from the standpoint of 24 hour rotations and days,Feb 29th as another
day and rotation accounts for the orbital drift that occurs through
Mar 1st every non leap year.

No point in going into further details such as the 11 minute orbital
discrepancy which separates 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes from the
idealized calendar format of 365 1/4 rotations when you have a
mindnumbing 366 1/4 rotations as a balance for 1 orbital circuit.On a
scale of 1 to 10,this Ra/Dec driven error is unlike anything seen
before and is simply 10 on a catastrophic scale for trying to squeeze
1465 rotations into 4 orbital circuits despite having cause and effect
before readers in terms of the 1461 day/night cycles and subsequently
the 1461 times the temperature fluctuates across 4 years telling
readers that the balance is 365 1/4 rotations per circuit.

You have these guys trying their level best to make something out of a
'leap second' tied to daily rotation while forgetting or not knowing
what the Feb 29th leap day correction does in restoring the
proportional balance between the number of rotations in a year/orbital
circuit and this macro view the current fad look catastrophically
dumb,not bad,not poor,sheer and utter intellectual desolation.

Do you want to explain what Feb 29th does while adhering to 1465
rotations for 4 orbital circuits then good luck to you,you can always
step back,look at the bigger picture and come to the only possible
conclusion as a person who prides their intelligence."

Cue hanson:

On Jul 14, 8:41Â*pm, "hanson" wrote:
"Chris.B" wrote about a Â*Wretch
Fossil and Fat cells found
in "Fat Gerald", The kelleher, which are snipped since
my friend, "Chris.B", does remain my best ever mule
to come back & ask for encore #45, because Chris has
wisely recognized the need to publicize these essential
but little known facts about Einstein & his Relativity work,
in Â*http://tinyurl.com/Crackpot-Einsteins-Crock
wherein it says:

-- "Chris.B" ( SEE end of post ) wrote:
--- KW, Koobee Wublee wrote:
---- Jan Panteltje wrote:----- "hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:

Einstein, in his own words, just a year before he
folded his relativity tent, closed his umbrella, kicked
the bucket and finally puffed and bit the grass,....
Einstein wrote, in 1954, to his Italian friend Besso:

|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, [my] gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein

So, that then is the end of Einstein's infamous fantasy
career-journey which concludes, long last, with what
most enlightened folks have suspected for a long time,
if not outright from the start, that:
====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ======
===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ====

Einstein flagellated himself & came clean (1), after
he was used by the Zios for their own, to them then
noble political agenda. (2)
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein (1)
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2 (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity (2)
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR (2)

GR/SR is a useless crock o'****, save it being
"a Base", an "al Qaida", for Einstein Dingleberries
to worship Albert's sphincter.. although AE said
not to do that.

Professor Panteltje wrote:

I do get a bit sick of the 'Einstein was right again crowd'.
He was not, he was just a math fiddler, curve fitter.
If somebody asks: How much is 2 + 3, and Einstein
would have answered : 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.
Then saying: "see, he once did say 5, he was right again",
is really really bad.
He had no clue, and died without one.
That he was pushed by the US at that time as a great
scientist to brush up the Jewish image was also a mistake,
as he did not have that clue, and just jammed science
with his curve fitting replacing simple physics understanding.

KW wrote:

Please allow Yours Truly to remind everyone whether if he/she is a
true scholar of physics or another Orwellian-ill-educated Einstein
Dingleberry that fall in the following ridiculous traits:

** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS

Newton discovered the law of gravity in which if the gravitating mass
is positive, gravitational force is attractive. The reverse, although
never been observed, must be true. That is if the gravitating mass is
negative, the gravitational effect must be repulsive or antigravity.
shrug

Later on, it was discovered by Poisson that the gradient of the
Newtonian gravitational potential is equivalent to the mass density.
In free space, this mass density [rho] is zero.

hanson wrote:

Revisiting an earlier discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
Newton in his 2 or 3rd Principia edition, 300 years
before Einstein, addresses Gravitation as
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2.
Einstein was to lazy or stupid to incorporate
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2 into his GR croc. Or maybe
Albert was still scared from his 1907 confession
and apology for him having stolen E-mc^2.
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft

Despite all that, like brainwashed addicted cultists,
current day Dingleberries still worship Einstein's
sphincter, full well knowing that for the last 70 years,
experiments show Newtonian's gravitation also to be:
G = H^2/rho
wherein H is the Hubble constent and rho is the
mas-density (even on cosmic scales), (some
small digits & pi omitted here) all of which can
be concatenated into the skeletal 1234 cosmic
envelope as
c = (GM/R)^1/2 = (GMH)^1/3 = (GM*b_r)^1/4
IOW, none of Einstein's convoluted **** has
any use in the here and real universe that we
live in. .... KW is correct in his assessment.

KW continued & wrote:

However, it does not take a genius to figure out if the
mass density is negative, gravitational effect becomes
repulsive. Poisson was the very first person to suggest
antigravity but knew better not to. Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar was just so ****ing ignorant that this
nitwit, this plagiarist, and the liar had no hesitation to claim
negative mass density in vacuum in which the giants before this
nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar knew better not to go there.
shrug
Now, the self-styled physicists are getting hard-ons whenever Dark
Energy (negative mass density in vacuum) is mentioned. What the ****
does negative mass mean? The only plausible answer is ignorance.
After all, they are still worshipping Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar as a god. Anything this nitwit, the
plagiarist, and this liar uttered just bedazzaled the hell out of
these self-styled physicists. That is called Dingleberry
worshipping. shrug
Moving on to GR, the silliness embraced by the self-styled physicists
exponentially amplifies. The Schwarzschild metric was discovered by
Hilbert not Schwarzschild. Both metrics are mathematically legal
solutions to the field equations that are static, spherically
symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild's original solution
does not allow for the existence of black holes. Let's look at the
Schwarzschild metric before the integrating constant is identified
through the boundary requirement of satisfying the Newtonian law of
gravity. There are more integration constants, but for the purpose of
this discussion, they are ignored.

** ds^2 = c^2 (1 + K / r) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 + K / r) - r^2 dO^2
Where
** K = One of the many integration constants
** dO^2 = cos^2(Latitude) dLongitude^2 + dLatitude^2

Notice this particular solution predicts just about everything from
gravitation to antigravity. There is no definitive reasoning to pin-
point this particular integration constant as the following besides
through this boundary condition that emphasizes hind sights are
always 20/20. shrug

** K = - 2 G M / c^2, Newtonian compatibility requirement

This point collaborates with Professor Ponte's astute observation of
how Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar reasoned.
shrug

Chris.B" wrote:

I fully agree with what KW, JP & hanson said above.
I adore and revere Koobee Wublee, Jan Panteltje and hanson
I am honored to be on the poster list as an appendage..
I have requested them to repost his note every time
I do respond to it. I need to see this post every day.
It makes me feel being intelligent and smart like they are.
I don't know any arithmetic nor algebra at all.
My personal negativity which I have posted about in my
google group profile forces me to be like this. Here is
my passport-http://tinyurl.com/Picture-of-Chris-B

Lies damned lies and Hanson

And then wretch said:

Fat cells found in “presolar� meteorite

Dr. Dan Richman discovered lipids in meteorite Murchison as shown in
Fig. 8 at
http://astrobiology.jhu.edu/wp-conte...2011-2-2-prebi...

However, the lipids are in fact fossilized fat cells as labeled at
Fig. 1: http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?...77259053&p=226

White fat cells (adipocytes) contain a single lipid droplet surrounded
by cytoplasm, as shown in these images:
Fig. 2: http://www.wretch.cc/album/show.php?...77267355&p=227
Image source and credit for Fig. 2: http://jcem.endojournals.org/content...expansion.html

http://tanyapeale.com/blog1/wp-conte...adipocyte1.gif

Fat cells differ from red blood cells in that fat cells can have
different sizes in an animal while red blood cells have same size in
an animal.

Geological vesicles show no concentric circles, especially the central
dark circle marked with green line in Fig. 1 above.

and:

On 7月13日, 下�4時27分, Wretch Fossil wrote:

- Show quoted text -

Added on July 13, 2011:
Lipid droplets have no membranes.

The following images show lipid droplets have no membranes no matter
they exist in a fat cell or not:
http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/76211/enlarge

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/316590/enlarge

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/311662/enlarge


And on and on and on. Are we having fun yet?

"Chris.B" wrote about a Wretch
Fossil and Fat cells found
in "Fat Gerald", The kelleher, asking: "And on & on &
on. Are we having fun yet?" but which are snipped since
my friend, "Chris.B", does remain my best ever mule
to come back & ask for encore #46, because Chris has
wisely recognized the need to publicize these essential
but little known facts about Einstein & his Relativity work,
in http://tinyurl.com/Crackpot-Einsteins-Crock
wherein it says:

-- "Chris.B" ( SEE end of post ) wrote:
--- KW, Koobee Wublee wrote:
---- Jan Panteltje wrote:
----- "hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:
Einstein, in his own words, just a year before he
folded his relativity tent, closed his umbrella, kicked
the bucket and finally puffed and bit the grass,....
Einstein wrote, in 1954, to his Italian friend Besso:

|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, [my] gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein

So, that then is the end of Einstein's infamous fantasy
career-journey which concludes, long last, with what
most enlightened folks have suspected for a long time,
if not outright from the start, that:
====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ======
===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ====

Einstein flagellated himself & came clean (1), after
he was used by the Zios for their own, to them then
noble political agenda. (2)
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein (1)
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2 (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft (1)
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity (2)
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR (2)

GR/SR is a useless crock o'****, save it being
"a Base", an "al Qaida", for Einstein Dingleberries
to worship Albert's sphincter.. although AE said
not to do that.

Professor Panteltje wrote:

I do get a bit sick of the 'Einstein was right again crowd'.
He was not, he was just a math fiddler, curve fitter.
If somebody asks: How much is 2 + 3, and Einstein
would have answered : 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9.
Then saying: "see, he once did say 5, he was right again",
is really really bad.
He had no clue, and died without one.
That he was pushed by the US at that time as a great
scientist to brush up the Jewish image was also a mistake,
as he did not have that clue, and just jammed science
with his curve fitting replacing simple physics understanding.

KW wrote:
Please allow Yours Truly to remind everyone whether if he/she is a
true scholar of physics or another Orwellian-ill-educated Einstein
Dingleberry that fall in the following ridiculous traits:

** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS

Newton discovered the law of gravity in which if the gravitating mass
is positive, gravitational force is attractive. The reverse, although
never been observed, must be true. That is if the gravitating mass is
negative, the gravitational effect must be repulsive or antigravity.
shrug

Later on, it was discovered by Poisson that the gradient of the
Newtonian gravitational potential is equivalent to the mass density.
In free space, this mass density [rho] is zero.

hanson wrote:
Revisiting an earlier discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
Newton in his 2 or 3rd Principia edition, 300 years
before Einstein, addresses Gravitation as
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2.
Einstein was to lazy or stupid to incorporate
G = d2(1/rho)/dt^2 into his GR croc. Or maybe
Albert was still scared from his 1907 confession
and apology for him having stolen E-mc^2.
http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein
http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2
http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft

Despite all that, like brainwashed addicted cultists,
current day Dingleberries still worship Einstein's
sphincter, full well knowing that for the last 70 years,
experiments show Newtonian's gravitation also to be:
G = H^2/rho
wherein H is the Hubble constent and rho is the
mas-density (even on cosmic scales), (some
small digits & pi omitted here) all of which can
be concatenated into the skeletal 1234 cosmic
envelope as
c = (GM/R)^1/2 = (GMH)^1/3 = (GM*b_r)^1/4
IOW, none of Einstein's convoluted **** has
any use in the here and real universe that we
live in. .... KW is correct in his assessment.

KW continued & wrote:
However, it does not take a genius to figure out if the
mass density is negative, gravitational effect becomes
repulsive. Poisson was the very first person to suggest
antigravity but knew better not to. Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar was just so ****ing ignorant that this
nitwit, this plagiarist, and the liar had no hesitation to claim
negative mass density in vacuum in which the giants before this
nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar knew better not to go there.
shrug
Now, the self-styled physicists are getting hard-ons whenever Dark
Energy (negative mass density in vacuum) is mentioned. What the ****
does negative mass mean? The only plausible answer is ignorance.
After all, they are still worshipping Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar as a god. Anything this nitwit, the
plagiarist, and this liar uttered just bedazzaled the hell out of
these self-styled physicists. That is called Dingleberry
worshipping. shrug
Moving on to GR, the silliness embraced by the self-styled physicists
exponentially amplifies. The Schwarzschild metric was discovered by
Hilbert not Schwarzschild. Both metrics are mathematically legal
solutions to the field equations that are static, spherically
symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild's original solution
does not allow for the existence of black holes. Let's look at the
Schwarzschild metric before the integrating constant is identified
through the boundary requirement of satisfying the Newtonian law of
gravity. There are more integration constants, but for the purpose of
this discussion, they are ignored.

** ds^2 = c^2 (1 + K / r) dt^2 - dr^2 / (1 + K / r) - r^2 dO^2
Where
** K = One of the many integration constants
** dO^2 = cos^2(Latitude) dLongitude^2 + dLatitude^2

Notice this particular solution predicts just about everything from
gravitation to antigravity. There is no definitive reasoning to pin-
point this particular integration constant as the following besides
through this boundary condition that emphasizes hind sights are
always 20/20. shrug

** K = - 2 G M / c^2, Newtonian compatibility requirement

This point collaborates with Professor Ponte's astute observation of
how Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar reasoned.
shrug

Chris.B" wrote:
I fully agree with what KW, JP & hanson said above.
I adore and revere Koobee Wublee, Jan Panteltje and hanson
I am honored to be on the poster list as an appendage..
I have requested them to repost his note every time
I do respond to it. I need to see this post every day.
It makes me feel being intelligent and smart like they are.
I don't know any arithmetic nor algebra at all.
My personal negativity which I have posted about in my
google group profile forces me to be like this. Here is
my passport-http://tinyurl.com/Picture-of-Chris