EINSTEINIANA: THE FUNDAMENTAL NIGHTMARE

(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a
substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter,
then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is
experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible)
implications:

1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with
the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a
prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary
physics as a whole.

2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with
the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where
the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover,
there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed
of the observer:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

Pentcho Valev

On 7/4/10 12:11 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a
substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter,
then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is
experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible)
implications:

Try using the correct equations, those og general relativity.

Einsteiniana's fundamental nightmare can be formulated in the
following way:

Judging from the frequency shift measured in a gravitational field,
the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer in perfect
accordance with Newton's emission theory of light (that is, Einstein's
1905 light postulate is false).

The nightmare is so horrible that sometimes Einsteinians lose control
and expose the fundamental idiocy of Einstein's general relativity:

THE FUNDAMENTAL IDIOCY OF EINSTEIN'S GENERAL RELATIVITY: The frequency
varies in perfect accordance with Newton's emission theory of light
but the speed of light doesn't - it varies faster by a factor of two:

http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath115/kmath115.htm
"In the general theory of relativity the predicted frequency shift for
light in a gravitational field is the same as Einstein had predicted
in 1911. However, in the 1915 theory, the amount of deflection which a
ray of light is predicted to undergo when passing by a gravitating
body is twice as much as he had predicted in 1911."

Pentcho Valev wrote:

(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a
substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter,
then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is
experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible)
implications:

1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with
the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a
prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary
physics as a whole.

2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with
the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where
the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover,
there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed
of the observer:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

Pentcho Valev

On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 22:11:38 -0700 (PDT), Pentcho Valev
wrote:

(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a
substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter,
then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is
experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible)
implications:

1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with
the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a
prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary
physics as a whole.

2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with
the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where
the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover,
there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed
of the observer:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

That is bull****, of course.

The distance between water wavecrests does not depend on the speed of one's
boat.

Pentcho Valev



Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)
If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with
a substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the
emitter, then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING,
and this is experimentally confirmed.
The above formula allows two (incompatible) implications:

1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases
with the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a
prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for
contemporary physics as a whole.

2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with
the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where
the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover,
there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed
of the observer:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
- THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
Pentcho Valev --


Henry Wilson wrote:
That is bull****, of course.
The distance between water wavecrests does
not depend on the speed of one's boat.
---
.......Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.

hanson wrote:
.... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves. Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's sphincter.

Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
distances as the speed of the boat increases. You'll be surprised.
ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
particles then does a comparable volume of water...

Have fun, and thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahanson

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 09:54:45 -0700, "hanson" wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
- THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
Pentcho Valev --


Henry Wilson wrote:
That is bull****, of course.
The distance between water wavecrests does
not depend on the speed of one's boat.
---
.......Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.

hanson wrote:
... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves.

My model of a photon is that it resembles a length of ball chain, tapered at
the ends. The 'balls' represent nodes of a standing wave running back and forth
along the lump of 'aether' carried by the photon itself. Photons are
oscillating particles that have an effective length and cross section. Their
natural wavelength is intrinsic and universal....the distance between 'balls'.

However, if a photon is emitted by and ACCELERATING source, the back end
briefly moves up on the front end, causing a permanent shortening of
wavelength. This I have called ADoppler as distinct from conventional VDoppler
which is the 'rate of wavecrest arrival'. I have good evidence for this.

It is th scientific ignorance of ADoppler that renders ALL astronomy wrong,
since stellar velocity estimates are likely to be way out.

Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's sphincter.

Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
distances as the speed of the boat increases.


That's different. the boat speed is responsible for the waves.

The subsequent distance between wave crests remains the same no matter how fast
an aquatic observer is traveling. The dingleberries confuse 'wavelength' with
wavecrest arrival frequency'.

You'll be surprised.
ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
particles then does a comparable volume of water...

Well, I'm sure light is affected in some small way as it travels across vast
distances of very rare gas....enough to cause a distance dependent redshift.

Have fun, and thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahanson


Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
"hanson" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

Pentcho wrote:
(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
- THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
Pentcho Valev --

Adressing Pentcho, Henry Wilson wrote:
That is bull****, of course.
The distance between water wavecrests does
not depend on the speed of one's boat.

hanson wrote:
... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves.
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves. Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's
sphincter.

Henry decribes his Photon model and wrote:
My model of a photon is that it resembles a length of ball chain,
tapered at the ends. The 'balls' represent nodes of a standing
wave running back and forth
along the lump of 'aether' carried by the photon itself. Photons are
oscillating particles that have an effective length and cross section.
Their natural wavelength is intrinsic and universal....the distance
between 'balls'.
However, if a photon is emitted by and ACCELERATING source,
the back end briefly moves up on the front end, causing a permanent
shortening of wavelength. This I have called ADoppler as distinct
from conventional VDoppler which is the 'rate of wavecrest arrival'.
I have good evidence for this.
It is th scientific ignorance of ADoppler that renders ALL astronomy
wrong, since stellar velocity estimates are likely to be way out.

hanson wrote:
Wonderful story, Henry. If it enhances your Weltbild, then you have a
winner for yourself. Selling it though is another matter as you know.

Your gag reminds me of the light model that depicts EM radiation
as a chain-link trajectory between emitter and absorber, with the
entire chain length being a concatenated span, depending on
gravitaional influence. The individual photon itself is one single link
in form of a packet of periodically pulsating energy, manifesting
alternatively as a waning and waxing torus of electric then magnetic
energy... etc.. etc...

There are dozens if not hundreds of variants of the Photon saga
around. But I have yet to see anyone pointing at his own model
or equation and say: "See here! When I looked at my equation,
it immediately told me how to make this gizmo, which I patented
and which made me financially independent." --- Since NO such
event has ever taken place, not even for Einstein, I find it hilarious
that folks here cuss and curse each other over their respective
perception of nature.... ahahahaha....

Initially hanson wrote:
Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
distances as the speed of the boat increases.You'll be surprised.

Henry wrote:
The subsequent distance between wave crests remains the same
no matter how fast an aquatic observer is traveling. The dingleberries
confuse 'wavelength' with wavecrest arrival frequency'.

hanson wrote:
ahahahahaha.. Henry, you did NOT perform the above experiment.
You made a Gedanken experiment, which has the same fatal flaw
that Einstein Dingleberries are accused of.. and as you say, create
amongst other things, " a religion that worships negative space."

Initially hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
particles then does a comparable volume of water...

Henry wrote:
Well, I'm sure light is affected in some small way as it travels across
vast distances of very rare gas....enough to cause a distance
dependent redshift.

hanson wrote:
.... ahahaha.. Yeah, the tired light gig, the gravit-retardation song,
and all the other alternative stories, fabulations and grand tales
that are floationg around. All are fascinating in their own way...
And of course, all do only reflect very tiny aspects of the elusive
reality of light. There is so much about the photon that we have
not discovered yet... Only Einstein Dingleberries think otherwise.

A lot could be realized and put into perspective if more would
be posted about the scales of the domains, along with what is
discussed. Example: If the Sun is grapefruit in size, the Earth is
a ballpoint pen tip in size. The Earth-Sun distance is about 16.5
yards (15 meters), & the solar *system* is ~ 1 kilometer across.
The next Star is 2500 km away!... with essentially Nothing being
between these lonely grapefruits and their satellite ball points..
....... ahahahaha.. Space is spacey... aka empty... ... [1] below.

More astounding: ALL the just mentioned show, proclaimed to be
so, is done by a ~ 3 lbs heavy glob of cranial matter that's made
up mainly of C, H, O & N atoms. 4 types of atoms only & 3/4 of
it being there as water. Yet these 3 lbs do contain 1-followed by
25 zeros of individual atoms, between which EM/photonic events
do take place that have produced this astounding anthropic pix.

Even more astounding again: When you look into the insides of
any one of theses atoms you will find a self-similar picture of the
same vast emptiness between points of matter... as was seen on
the celestial world level depicted above.... Lots of empty space
again, pun or no pun.... ahahahahaha....

Can you fathom now how EXTRAORDINARILY fantastic, grand &
profound EM phenomena are? .. IOW any and all current models
about Light do only reflect a very crude representation of Nature's
reality. So, fighting about, who is right or wrong, over a crude toy
of reality indicates quite obviously that.... ahahaha... ahahaha...
It's your turn now, guys, to say what EM is telling you...ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, Henry and guy/ette/s.... ahahahanson

Henry Wilson signs of and wrote:
Einstein's Relativity:...The religion that worships negative space.

hanson wrote:
[1] Pencil out how long and how far the space-shuttle would have
to fly, orbital speed, in intergalactic, "empty" space that contains
4 H-atoms/cubic meter, to garner 1 single kilogram of Hydrogen
with a catch funnel of, say, 10 meters in dia. Henry, here you are
allowed to make Gedanken experiments. But not so on the boat
in he lake... ahahahaha... Take care Henry.

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 23:15:53 -0700, "hanson" wrote:

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
"hanson" wrote:
"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:

hanson wrote:
... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves.
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves. Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's
sphincter.

Henry decribes his Photon model and wrote:
My model of a photon is that it resembles a length of ball chain,
tapered at the ends. The 'balls' represent nodes of a standing
wave running back and forth
along the lump of 'aether' carried by the photon itself. Photons are
oscillating particles that have an effective length and cross section.
Their natural wavelength is intrinsic and universal....the distance
between 'balls'.
However, if a photon is emitted by and ACCELERATING source,
the back end briefly moves up on the front end, causing a permanent
shortening of wavelength. This I have called ADoppler as distinct
from conventional VDoppler which is the 'rate of wavecrest arrival'.
I have good evidence for this.
It is th scientific ignorance of ADoppler that renders ALL astronomy
wrong, since stellar velocity estimates are likely to be way out.

hanson wrote:
Wonderful story, Henry. If it enhances your Weltbild, then you have a
winner for yourself. Selling it though is another matter as you know.

Your gag reminds me of the light model that depicts EM radiation
as a chain-link trajectory between emitter and absorber, with the
entire chain length being a concatenated span, depending on
gravitaional influence. The individual photon itself is one single link
in form of a packet of periodically pulsating energy, manifesting
alternatively as a waning and waxing torus of electric then magnetic
energy... etc.. etc...

There are dozens if not hundreds of variants of the Photon saga
around. But I have yet to see anyone pointing at his own model
or equation and say: "See here! When I looked at my equation,
it immediately told me how to make this gizmo, which I patented
and which made me financially independent." --- Since NO such
event has ever taken place, not even for Einstein, I find it hilarious
that folks here cuss and curse each other over their respective
perception of nature.... ahahahaha....

Our knowledge of light is restricted to when it is either emitted or absorbed.
Little or nothing is known about its form during transit. We can only
speculate. One thing is certain however....it takes TIME to go from A to B.

Initially hanson wrote:
Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
distances as the speed of the boat increases.You'll be surprised.

Henry wrote:
The subsequent distance between wave crests remains the same
no matter how fast an aquatic observer is traveling. The dingleberries
confuse 'wavelength' with wavecrest arrival frequency'.

hanson wrote:
ahahahahaha.. Henry, you did NOT perform the above experiment.
You made a Gedanken experiment, which has the same fatal flaw
that Einstein Dingleberries are accused of.. and as you say, create
amongst other things, " a religion that worships negative space."

That is not a gedanken. It is a practical experiment. It is possible to place a
floating object between two moving water wavecrests. The length of that object
is obviously NOT affected by observer movement. How could it be?

Initially hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
particles then does a comparable volume of water...

Henry wrote:
Well, I'm sure light is affected in some small way as it travels across
vast distances of very rare gas....enough to cause a distance
dependent redshift.

hanson wrote:
... ahahaha.. Yeah, the tired light gig, the gravit-retardation song,
and all the other alternative stories, fabulations and grand tales
that are floationg around. All are fascinating in their own way...
And of course, all do only reflect very tiny aspects of the elusive
reality of light. There is so much about the photon that we have
not discovered yet... Only Einstein Dingleberries think otherwise.

Yes. They know everything that it is possible to know.

A lot could be realized and put into perspective if more would
be posted about the scales of the domains, along with what is
discussed. Example: If the Sun is grapefruit in size, the Earth is
a ballpoint pen tip in size. The Earth-Sun distance is about 16.5
yards (15 meters), & the solar *system* is ~ 1 kilometer across.
The next Star is 2500 km away!... with essentially Nothing being
between these lonely grapefruits and their satellite ball points..
...... ahahahaha.. Space is spacey... aka empty... ... [1] below.

More astounding: ALL the just mentioned show, proclaimed to be
so, is done by a ~ 3 lbs heavy glob of cranial matter that's made
up mainly of C, H, O & N atoms. 4 types of atoms only & 3/4 of
it being there as water. Yet these 3 lbs do contain 1-followed by
25 zeros of individual atoms, between which EM/photonic events
do take place that have produced this astounding anthropic pix.

Even more astounding again: When you look into the insides of
any one of theses atoms you will find a self-similar picture of the
same vast emptiness between points of matter... as was seen on
the celestial world level depicted above.... Lots of empty space
again, pun or no pun.... ahahahahaha....

Can you fathom now how EXTRAORDINARILY fantastic, grand &
profound EM phenomena are? .. IOW any and all current models
about Light do only reflect a very crude representation of Nature's
reality. So, fighting about, who is right or wrong, over a crude toy
of reality indicates quite obviously that.... ahahaha... ahahaha...
It's your turn now, guys, to say what EM is telling you...ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, Henry and guy/ette/s.... ahahahanson

Well that's all very well..... but science will continue to progress even if
slowly at times.
I have published my discovery that light's wavelength is very much affected by
source ACCELERATION and until astronomers accept this fact, they will continue
to grossly over - or under- estimate stellar speeds. Also, if we ignore
Einstein's P2 crap, we also discover that the OBSERVED frequencies of very
distant periodic events may be very different from the real ones.

Henry Wilson signs of and wrote:
Einstein's Relativity:...The religion that worships negative space.

hanson wrote:
[1] Pencil out how long and how far the space-shuttle would have
to fly, orbital speed, in intergalactic, "empty" space that contains
4 H-atoms/cubic meter, to garner 1 single kilogram of Hydrogen
with a catch funnel of, say, 10 meters in dia. Henry, here you are
allowed to make Gedanken experiments. But not so on the boat
in he lake... ahahahaha... Take care Henry.

.....a remarkably polite and restrained posting from you Hanson.....I'm glad you
don't consider me your enemy....

.... so keep on laughing....


Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.

"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
....a remarkably polite and restrained posting from you Hanson
.....I'm glad you don't consider me your enemy....
... so keep on laughing....

hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHAHA.. Good one!, Henry!...
However, I do not consider anyone as my enemy.
Yet, some folks, like Greenies & Einstein Dingleberries,
invariably ask for enemas. But that is their yearning and
choosing. So, me being a great Samaritan, do oblige.
Thanks for the laughs, Henry... ahahaha... ahahanson

Henry Wilson wrote...
.......Einstein's Relativity = The religion that worships negative space.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:03:08 -0700, "hanson" wrote:


"Henry Wilson DSc" ..@.. wrote:
....a remarkably polite and restrained posting from you Hanson
.....I'm glad you don't consider me your enemy....
... so keep on laughing....

hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHAHA.. Good one!, Henry!...
However, I do not consider anyone as my enemy.
Yet, some folks, like Greenies & Einstein Dingleberries,
invariably ask for enemas. But that is their yearning and
choosing. So, me being a great Samaritan, do oblige.
Thanks for the laughs, Henry... ahahaha... ahahanson

Careful Hanson, Greenies are OK so long as they aren't the dope smoking, gay,
man-eating feminist and refugee hugging types.
There's basically nothing wrong with trying to save Homo Sapiens from
self-annihilation....although that's probably a lost cause already.

Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.