"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42E1E980.7071C2DF@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > Then you'll be more than happy to point out
> > the lie, right?

> You know full well where they were in your thesis.

You didn't point them out! I'd of thought you'd be
more than happy to point out my lies... unless I was
not lying, and you're just trying to get out of here
with your skin intact.

Too late!
__
Steve
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11e4tdkgflpjue1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:fPkEe.2084$Ok6.1532@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
> > Your crap unsays itself!
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response".

Oh, I thought that my response was absolutely
killer... remember this?

>>> i know why you cling to this belief but the wind doesnt constantly blow.

>>I know why you cling to this belief but the atmosphere is
>>never still.

>it doesnt continually move enough air to lift heavier gases above lighter
>ones. to a degree, yes....but it settles before reaching the ozone layer.

You crapped all over yourself with *that* one...

> and BTW, i found out why there are refrigerants found in the bottom of the
> ocean. care to take a guess?

Suppose you post the link... no begging the question here.

And lest we forget!

<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.

me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>

You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11e4tdkgflpjue1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:fPkEe.2084$Ok6.1532@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
> > Your crap unsays itself!
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response".

Oh, I thought that my response was absolutely
killer... remember this?

>>> i know why you cling to this belief but the wind doesnt constantly blow.

>>I know why you cling to this belief but the atmosphere is
>>never still.

>it doesnt continually move enough air to lift heavier gases above lighter
>ones. to a degree, yes....but it settles before reaching the ozone layer.

You crapped all over yourself with *that* one...

> and BTW, i found out why there are refrigerants found in the bottom of the
> ocean. care to take a guess?

Suppose you post the link... no begging the question here.

And lest we forget!

<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.

me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>

You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11e4tdkgflpjue1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:fPkEe.2084$Ok6.1532@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
> > Your crap unsays itself!
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response".

Oh, I thought that my response was absolutely
killer... remember this?

>>> i know why you cling to this belief but the wind doesnt constantly blow.

>>I know why you cling to this belief but the atmosphere is
>>never still.

>it doesnt continually move enough air to lift heavier gases above lighter
>ones. to a degree, yes....but it settles before reaching the ozone layer.

You crapped all over yourself with *that* one...

> and BTW, i found out why there are refrigerants found in the bottom of the
> ocean. care to take a guess?

Suppose you post the link... no begging the question here.

And lest we forget!

<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.

me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>

You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11e4tdkgflpjue1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:fPkEe.2084$Ok6.1532@newssvr29.news.prodigy.ne t...
>
> > Your crap unsays itself!
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response".

Oh, I thought that my response was absolutely
killer... remember this?

>>> i know why you cling to this belief but the wind doesnt constantly blow.

>>I know why you cling to this belief but the atmosphere is
>>never still.

>it doesnt continually move enough air to lift heavier gases above lighter
>ones. to a degree, yes....but it settles before reaching the ozone layer.

You crapped all over yourself with *that* one...

> and BTW, i found out why there are refrigerants found in the bottom of the
> ocean. care to take a guess?

Suppose you post the link... no begging the question here.

And lest we forget!

<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.

me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>

You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42E1EC3D.8FDE06D2@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > It mentions universe in the Bible? Don't we all
> > understand 'day'? What about all the missing
> > 'begats'? Were dinosaurs on the Ark?

> The same name we give it now, Heavens.

OK! Thanks for the explanation.
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42E1EC3D.8FDE06D2@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > It mentions universe in the Bible? Don't we all
> > understand 'day'? What about all the missing
> > 'begats'? Were dinosaurs on the Ark?

> The same name we give it now, Heavens.

OK! Thanks for the explanation.
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42E1EC3D.8FDE06D2@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > It mentions universe in the Bible? Don't we all
> > understand 'day'? What about all the missing
> > 'begats'? Were dinosaurs on the Ark?

> The same name we give it now, Heavens.

OK! Thanks for the explanation.
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42E1EC3D.8FDE06D2@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > It mentions universe in the Bible? Don't we all
> > understand 'day'? What about all the missing
> > 'begats'? Were dinosaurs on the Ark?

> The same name we give it now, Heavens.

OK! Thanks for the explanation.
__
Steve
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11e4tbjed2r35a1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:eNkEe.2083$Ok6.923@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net ...
> > i know thats what youre trying to do but i wont let you. :-) my post to
> > YOU clearly stated -30 degrees. :-)
>
> > But not as a limiting factor!
>
> lol yes it was! although you desperately attempt to weasel your way off the
> hook theres just no way around it. my statement was clear. you remind me
> of clinton trying to weasel his way out of lying to the grand jury. funny
> to watch. :-)

Nope... 'such as' is no limiting phrase. And it was
not in the original spec. You, sir, are a dastardly
welch, and not of the sporting sort.


> > without your self-imposed low
> > ambient spec
>
> irrelevent since i CLEARLY said -30 degrees. :-)

We can all read, Nate... you're welching.

> > I win! Therefore, I win!
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i lose".

Thanks for your admission... we can put this to
rest now, right?
__
Steve
..