Good arguments, Chris. However, I find the human mind typically
resists ideas that are too far from personal experience. We can't do
anything about this resistance in a general way. We can only work to
overcome this genetic limitation in ourselves and learn to avoid
people who cannot go
. We just have to
accept the idea that humans are not the top of the line life form and
we are not in God's image, at least on the surface.
Ed
On Jul 30, 2009, at 11:52 AM, OrionWorks wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
I have no idea what you mean Steven when you say
The experience IS what
Fran, in proposing your explanation, you conveniently ignore a large
amount of the evidence. In addition, a temporal lens effect should
show a lot more than just a few UFOs. We should see a variety of
objects and events, which is clearly not the case. A theory is not
worth considering if
, irrational
skeptics will always exist no matter what evidence is presented. These
people have no importance and are eventually ignored.
Ed
On Jul 30, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
If the experience is not real, it means that we cannot trust our
eyes, our
I too have studied and given lot of thought to the UFO phenomenon.
Steven has provided a good description of many of my conclusions, so I
won't try to add anything except to ask one question. Why do people
have such a difficult time accepting such a well documented
phenomenon? To start
of temporal telescope where
the
observer catches glimpses of these everyday spacecraft from our
future.
Fran
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 11:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT
maintained for so long.
Fran
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 12:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: The Abduction Paradigm
Hi Fran,
If you want to explain a phenomenon, you need to be aware
The Mills situation is a bit more complex than you note, Stephen.
Hydrinos are not the only result of the Mills theory. He has created
a new model for atomic interaction and a new model for calculating
many fundamental constants including the ionization energy of most
elements. His model
statement and it still would have been accurate...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 7:18 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:More From the Steorn Jury
Come now, let's be realistic. He did
On Jul 13, 2009, at 1:33 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:59 PM 7/12/2009, you wrote:
All said, I see the gaping hole in Takahashi's theory being the
orders of magnitude lack of detectable high energy alphas. Perhaps
it is just a calculation error on my part. It wouldn't be the first
On Jul 12, 2009, at 6:18 AM, Mauro Lacy wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Mauro Lacy wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I don't know why he didn't run.
He didn't ran because he was a scapegoat. Scapegoats don't run, by
their
very definition.
It's always better to blame it all on a lone
Come now, let's be realistic. He did not run because he would not have
been safe anywhere in the world. When you damage so many people, many
of whom are very powerful and will connected to the Jewish community,
you will be killed very soon after leaving the US. Besides, his
family was
Lacy wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
And thus we see the basic flaw in wind generation. Unless a backup
source of power is in place and can be connected to an active grid,
wind power is not practical.
You can use an intermediate stage as energy storage. Why not produce
Hidrogen with wind (and solar
On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Emacs, Linux, Mac OS, Solaris, OpenOffice, MS Word -- would you
claim that any of these have simply been left to sit on a shelf,
and that's why they haven't become so buggy they can't be used?
I meant just the
On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
You could claim, of course, that
Windows NT was a rewrite of the old Windows OS and so it isn't as
old
as it looks . . .
That is exactly what Brooks (and I) have in mind. You have to go
back to square one and
On Jul 9, 2009, at 7:18 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
I have heard that Apple is more ruthless about backward
compatibility. Microsoft cannot afford to be, because if the new
Windows does not work with old hardware, people will eventually
throw away their hardware and buy
And thus we see the basic flaw in wind generation. Unless a backup
source of power is in place and can be connected to an active grid,
wind power is not practical. This source needs to be engineered into
a system rather than used as an add-on. The system in the US is too
fragile and too
Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Jones. As you observed, the
video shows the same attitude toward cold fusion that has played out
in the US and in most other countries. You attempt to explain this
situation below, but I suggest you miss some important features of the
problem.
On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
And thus we see the basic flaw in wind generation. Unless a backup
source of power is in place and can be connected to an active grid,
wind power is not practical.
My comment clearly applied to the US. The situation
They say this is an open system, which has the advantage of putting
the user in control. Why would it not also put the hacker in control?
Ed
On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:49 PM, OrionWorks wrote:
I've labeled this thread OT because the subject would seem to be
unrelated to the issues concerning the
. The backdoors would not be discovered unless someone who
knows the code and has time to check any changes finds them. Why has
this not happened to Linux?
Ed
On Jul 8, 2009, at 1:24 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
They say this is an open system, which has
to be less sensitive to virus and other kinds of code changes.
Ed
On Jul 8, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
This helps explain the situation, Stephen. However, suppose I make
some neat changes in an open source program and add a few backdoors.
Then I send
How does anyone know that the obit of Nebran Planet X lasts for 3600
years except by relating it to the events that are assumed to be
caused by the planet? In other words, this looks like circular
reasoning, which gives no evidence at all.
Ed
On Jul 4, 2009, at 5:38 AM, Taylor J. Smith
Jones, I think we need to be clear about the attitude toward CF. If a
person does not accept the basic concept that a nuclear reaction can
occur under CF conditions, either because they are totally committed
to conventional ideas or because they are just plain ignorant, no
evidence short
and ARPA who can be swayed by good
evidence, DESPITE what the dyed-in-the-wool skeptics. They are aware
of how
many times the mainstream has been totally wrong before.
Jones
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Jones, I think we need to be clear
Michel, I understand that power measurements are not made while the
superwave is on. The superwave is only used to load the cathode and
start the reaction. Production of over 30 watts while applying less
than 1 watt is so unambiguous that the ability to produce excess power
is clearly
While what you say is true, Jed, not all vaccines are equally safe or
effective, especially when it involves influenza. In my case, I got a
flu shot a few years ago and suffered from a sore shoulder for months
and still got the flu. I find that certain natural immune enhances and
On Jun 29, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
While what you say is true, Jed, not all vaccines are equally safe or
effective, especially when it involves influenza.
Absolutely! The 1976 swine flu vaccines were spectacularly
ineffective and dangerous
How do they plan to enforce delivery of the vaccine? Personally, the
police would have to come to my door and restrain me. How about you?
Ed
On Jun 26, 2009, at 4:20 PM, John Berry wrote:
I don't think this can be considered political as no one votes for
the UN or WHO and it's a health
Perhaps someone can contact this person and advise him to do a little
homework about the subject before he embarrasses himself further.
Ed
On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Here is an article published in the future (dated July 4, 2009):
On Jun 21, 2009, at 8:12 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Speaking of how politics and energy overlap...
Here is a supercritical way that the DoE could reduce natural gas
usage significantly:
http://www.r744.com/knowledge/faq/files/ecocute_all.pdf
Why aren't we doing this here, or even talking
Nicely done and very near the truth, but with this additional
information that recently came to light.
Further analysis reveals that the first use of cold fusion was in
China where it helped the government off set the collapse in the
dollar in 2010 by reducing the country's use of oil.
This is a nice imaginative theory described in the article, Frank, but
it does not prove that Bose Condensates of hydrogen exist. In fact,
such structure should show up as anomalies in diffusion, which they do
not. If a structure containing H(D) can move through the lattice
without
meters. The rate of diffusion should increase when a proton
conduction of this length is stimualted at that frequency. If I
were not on the road, living in a hotel in Knoxville, and here
working on CO2 capture, I would try this.
Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Fri, Jun 19
need to be made, the garage might be a useful
laboratory.
Ed
On Jun 19, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:16 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe
To avoid making yourself ill with worry
To avoid making yourself ill with worry, let me add a bit of
optimism. Cold fusion has left the garage level of research and
entered the level of a well funded laboratory. This is progress. The
theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of
the trained professional.
Well Frank, such ideas have value only when they show why and how most
observed behaviors occur and how to make the behavior occur more
consistently and at higher levels. All theories I know about met only
a small fraction of this requirement. If you can have better success
in this
Thanks for the preprint Frank. Unfortunately some of the equations are
not visible, no doubt because I use a Mac.
On Jun 18, 2009, at 12:08 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which
kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid
On Jun 18, 2009, at 2:15 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I
have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected
to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near
absolute zero. In addition,
Let me see if I can explain what you are saying in your paper.
1. You accept that Planck's constant describes the energy of photons.
2. You propose that your constant describes the geometry (size) of the
emitting structure.
3. You assume the size of the photon is given by rp, as defined in
I agree with John, managing and contributing to one list is hard
enough without adding to the problem by using multiple lists. Most
people on this list are adults and should be able to agree on
something so simple as when political or religious discussion gets to
be too much without
:
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 11:08 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Discussion/Debate: Creating [VoT] to handle OT
discussions.
I agree with John, managing and contributing to one list is hard
enough without adding to the problem by using
On Jun 16, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 11:08 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Discussion/Debate: Creating [VoT] to handle OT
discussions.
I agree with John, managing and contributing to one list
While I agree with your basic point, I agree some things are best
discussed in private with the people who are interested. I suggest if
a a subject comes up that is not of general interest, the people who
would like to explore the idea further make their wish known so that
the discussion
I suggest a public discussion stops when anyone objects. Following the
objection, anyone who wishes to continue the discussion privately can
make their wish known publicly. These people would be put on the cc of
the private exchange. If no one makes such a request, the discussion
stops.
On Jun 16, 2009, at 4:05 PM, OrionWorks wrote:
From Jed:
Latest info. See:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/highaltitudewindpower/
High Altitude wind power generation is indeed an intriguing concept.
According to this article:
Startups like KiteGen, Sky Windpower, Magenn, and
I agree with the view expressed here by Lawrence. In addition, this is
a group of individuals who like to get to know each other while they
discussion the scientific ideas. This social interaction is important
and I would like to have it accepted as a normal part of these
communications.
On Jun 15, 2009, at 3:45 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote:
--- On Sun, 6/14/09, Mike Carrell mi...@medleas.com wrote:
There is no 'try to understand' of many of the caustic things he's
said about workers and the average man. Now everyone is going to try
and candy coat things. I'm sorry, try
On Jun 15, 2009, at 6:24 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote:
--- On Mon, 6/15/09, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Kyle, in the absence of Jed, I feel it's my duty to educate
about cold fusion. If you want to know what has been learned
up to 2007, I suggest you read my book The Science
On Jun 14, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
I miss Jed. I hope he comes back.
You know, when things didn't go his way at Infinite Energy, he never
came back.
And it may come to pass that Grok's purpose will be fulfilled: He
will
have succeeded in
to dictate how a minority view reality.
Of course there are differing levels I suppose, grok was outside of
normal not in his logic but in his hostility.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
On Jun 14, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
fznidar
Unfortunately, here is were politics get into the act and this is why
politics need to be discussed if any sense is to be made of the energy
problem. The US will not and cannot give up the use of coal. Too many
jobs are at risk and the material supplies too much energy that cannot
be
Well stated Steven! Jed makes people think by making informed
arguments, some of which I also do not share. Apparently his style is
painful to some people, I'm sorry to discover.
Ed
On Jun 14, 2009, at 11:40 AM, OrionWorks wrote:
Hi Kyle,
Regarding my previous response:
Kyle sez:
Bill, I agree with Steven. Jed, unlike some recent contributions, was
not engaging in emotional and loaded statements about religion in his
recent comments, which should be the reason for banishment. As for
politics, I suggest it is almost impossible to separate political
comment from
On Jun 12, 2009, at 9:48 AM, Alexander Hollins wrote:
From Jed:
I must say, I disagree with the sentiments expressed.
I can think of lots of more compelling arguments for
alternative energy, such as the fact that it would save
tens of thousands of lives every week and prevent global
As I said in my talk at Univ. of Missouri, skeptics have to believe
that everyone studying cold fusion makes mistakes that are only
visible to a skeptic. Shanahan proves this point very nicely. The
attitude comes from an excessive ego without any compensating
humility. The reaction says
How did the writer know that the MIB did not knock? Are we to assume
that the neighbors observe the house so carefully that a random van
parking in front of the house for the few seconds it would take to get
to the house and enter would be observed by someone not also eating at
that time?
Thanks Steven, I missed the small detail that this message was from
the future. Nevertheless, when I also go into the future, the same
question comes up. Sorry to hear that reporter was also spirited away
by the MIB. Should I also be worried in 4 years when this date arrives?
Ed
On Jun 1,
Sure Steven, this could be faked all kinds of ways. This fact alone
makes the demonstration totally uninteresting and non-threatening to
the MIB. So even if the effect is real, there is no purpose for the
MIB to get involved because no one would believe the claims even if
they were true.
Let me see if I understand the situation. A guy who has no scientific
background makes a disc turn with no apparent source of power. The
demonstration is close to a toy and Mylow has no ability to provide an
explanation. The MIB try to shut him down. In contrast, competent
scientists who
On May 20, 2009, at 10:02 AM, Rhong Dhong wrote:
the concept of class struggle...Marxism is discredited today...
capitalism was not on a one-way path to destruction, for which
Stalin sentenced him to SiberiaAmerican constitution by men
schooled in government, especially the
As much as I hate to agree with Grok's basic attitude toward
capitalism, I would like to suggest that several decisions, based in
the rules of capitalism, will eventually lead to the total destruction
of this approach, at least in the form practiced by the US.
The evidence can be most
It is truly amazing and scary to see how much power and influences the
skeptics have. Most ordinary people could not cause the suppression
these people can accomplish. For example, Pons was hounded out of the
Univ. of Utah, Bockris came close to losing his Distinguished
Professorship
Wow, we in CF are in excellent company. However, I doubt anything
will ever change. Arrogant skepticism is a fixed characteristic of
human nature and is self selected in certain professions, especially
the academic. This is something we all have to endure because it
will not change no
I don't think this is back peddling. This is one more effort by Park
to appear to be clever and funny at someone else's expense. He has no
opinion about the subject of cold fusion. He will say what ever makes
him look funny and wise to the ignorant.
Ed
On May 3, 2009, at 11:35 AM,
This is a breath of fresh air that can make an old cynic have faith
that science is not completely dead. I don't think guts are involved.
Duncan simply had to take the time to explore the data. Any rational
person who does this comes to the same conclusion. We pay entirely
too much
We are being treated to a general breakdown in intellectual integrity
these days in a wide range of subjects. We see this most clearly in
science, not just cold fusion, because this subject has objective ways
to decide what is true and what is not. As a result, when people are
found to
Well, we can see the influence of the pathological skeptics in the
APS. They still insist that the phenomenon is not worthy of having
the APS show any endorsement, no matter how indirect. The fact that
the APS has secessions about CF at their conferences, that a very
large data
You and many people Jeff, miss an important issue about finding ways
to reduce CO2 emission. Yes it is expensive, but so are all changes
in technology. The expense issue is only a distraction raised by
industries that will be harmed by the new technology. In contrast, the
general
The comments made by joclondon were understood and explored years ago,
which he would know if he had studied the literature and not used his
imagination to support Garwin's ignorance.
First of all, DC is used, which is supplied by a low impedance power
supply. As a result, there is very
You hit on the essential consequence of CF, Steven. This power source
could replace all other power sources everywhere and give the Third
world the same benefit the First World has, but at much less expense.
It would replace the grid and most of the pipelines that carry gas and
gasoline.
This idea falls into the same category as the idea of the solar
collector in space, or the solar sail to propel space craft, or
plowshare where atom bombs are exploded underground to generate
harvested power. These are all ideas that in principle can work but
have so many limitations and
How about figuring out how to get rid of all the new yeast cells that
they will produce. Yeasts to no work just to make energy. They work to
make more of their own kind. Maybe if the Church permits, micro
condoms could be used.
Ed
On Apr 2, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Really.
Consider the position Park has created for himself. He encouraged the
destruction of the reputations for two scientists who made one of the
most important discoveries of this century. He delayed development of
an energy source that can solve some of the most important threats to
Actually the issue is more complicated than Jed describes.
Conventional belief is that the chemical environment has very little
or no effect on whether a nuclear reaction will occur. The cold
fusion process challenges this belief.
Normally, nuclear processes require too much energy to
It's interesting and rather gratifying that the ACS provided the press
coverage and interest that the APS failed to do.
Ed
On Mar 25, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The press coverage of the ACS meeting and the 20th anniversary has
increased the number of visits and downloads.
On Mar 24, 2009, at 8:35 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Kyle Mcallister wrote:
--- Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
[Robin von Spaandock wrote:]
I suspect not. CF (or LENR) is finicky, and no one
is yet certain of the precise
requirements (though there are now a few claims of
This is an impressive website and an impressive program, which shows
what can be accomplished by a well funded effort run by competent
people. It also shows the damage skeptics have done by stopping such
progress from taking place all over the world earlier in the field's
history.
Ed
On Mar 14, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
On Mar 13, 2009, at 8:36 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
ARRGH! How can everything in this field be so *vague* !?
If I read the messages from Jed and Dr. Storms correctly, it's not
known
at this time
My belief is that the Pd-Ag works because it is able to support a high
D/Pd at the surface because the diffusion rate is lower than pure Pd.
Also, it does not crack. I have tried pure silver, but it does not
absorb D.
Ed
On Mar 14, 2009, at 8:12 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply
to jump in.
Ed
On Mar 13, 2009, at 8:14 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
I'm frustrated with this exchange as well. You seem to be unwilling
to
acknowledge that any of my comments have any merit at all.
Oh come now. Of course I realize what you are saying! I know what
On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:37 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Does Johnson-Matthey Type A palladium still work?
Fleischmann and I do not know. The manufacturing method was changed
sometime after 1989 to reduce toxicity during manufacturing. The
newer formulation
Thanks for this detail Jed, but no where do I see mentioned that this
material is a Pd-Ag alloy. The emphasis is on the production method, a
method that is normally applied to pure Pd. Consequently, the
confusion remains.
Ed
On Mar 13, 2009, at 3:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms
archives and see for sure what was used. But, apparently
it's
not that easy.
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
Thanks for this detail Jed, but no where do I see mentioned that
this
material is a Pd-Ag alloy.
That is my recollection of what he told me.
This document says Fleischmann
Jed,
On several occasions you have opined that people in the CF field have
done a poor job of PR. Please explain how this can be done better.
Remember, this is science, not selling soap. Only certain methods are
acceptable without making the claims look like a scam, which other
On Mar 12, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
On several occasions you have opined that people in the CF field have
done a poor job of PR. Please explain how this can be done better.
Remember, this is science, not selling soap.
THAT is your first mistake
Snip
Frankly, I am somewhat fed up from hearing from you -- and much more
often from cold fusion researchers -- that nothing can be done and
that we should not even try, and that I do not understand scientists
or how science is done. Scientists are people, and I know a thing or
two
or whether something of an extraterrestrial
nature really did crash in Roswell back in 1947
I like the Roswell story.
As far as I know nobody made a dime off those weird photos. If it
was a
hoax it wasn't done for the money.
, or whether we humans
are actually being abducted by
On Mar 4, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
Right ... recovered memories are a wonderful arena. The folks whose
memories were recovered are apparently sincere. As to the
researchers
who, in many cases, helped those memories surface, that's another
require a basic change in religious belief and it
would provide one more reason to be afraid. After all, most people
are expected to have no contact with the aliens, so why bother with
the idea?
Ed
On Mar 4, 2009, at 3:20 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
The UFO phenomenon
On Mar 4, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
OrionWorks wrote:
Some follow-up comments
I presume this was from Jed, though I have not received the actual
post:
If I wake up remembering an encounter with a six foot tall ant, I
immediately conclude it was a dream. However,
You forget Jed that WWII was not a stimulus to the rest of the world
and we gained only because we sold the items that were destroyed for
gold. After WWII we were the only country that could manufacture much
of anything for a long time. I don't think the approach you suggest
would work
Nicely argued, Steven. Unfortunately Christianity is so filled with
such obvious conflicts with logic and even with statements in the
Bible, that a person could spend years trying to make sense of the
religion, as some scholars have attempted to do. Unfortunately, the
general public does
I agree with John, However, there seems to be a basic misunderstanding
about the difference between capitalism and socialism.
Capitalism works because it is designed to allow each person to make
decisions based on their own self interest. This is called freedom by
people who use simple
On Feb 15, 2009, at 11:45 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
- Original Message -
From: OrionWorks svj.orionwo...@gmail.com
Date: Sunday, February 15, 2009 11:30 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Climate Change
Hi Thomas,
Sunday's service
I believe in Intelligent Design.
Consider the possibility that
Too bad cold fusion doesn't rhyme with moron.
Ed
On Feb 14, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Conan O'Brien gets upset with the New York Times for saying there
are only 3 crystal structures of pure boron:
Jed, my reaction when I read this analysis was not the same as yours.
I'm inclined to conclude that the SEC ignored the letter simply
because no one below the top officials wanted the risk of rocking the
boat. Most people simply do not want to do anything that will
jeopardize their
On Feb 11, 2009, at 7:54 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
I'm inclined to conclude that the SEC ignored the letter simply
because no one below the top officials wanted the risk of rocking
the boat. Most people simply do not want to do anything that will
jeopardize
processor and 1.5 gigs of ram, takes 2 minutes, 15
seconds, from power on to desktop. )
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
You might be surprised to know that the Mac fast to turn off and
on, yet it
is just as fast and just as advanced as the Windows
You might be surprised to know that the Mac fast to turn off and on,
yet it is just as fast and just as advanced as the Windows machines.
The flaw is Microsoft. My iMac runs both operating systems so I can
do most of the real work using a friendly environment and switch to
Windows only
701 - 800 of 1275 matches
Mail list logo
