Hi Paul, > I for example offer all my research, free of charge.
I'm sure there is a good reason for it and it isn't because of your magnanimous personality. > And it seems obvious all those usenet posts begging > scientists to give "David Thomson" a Nobel Prize was merely you > masquerading under a yahoo addresses. Who in their right mind would plea > with the physicist community to give Dave Thomson a Nobel Prize?!?! > People don't even post such ridiculous pleas for Ed Witten. IMHO, if > true, and we all know it is, then that discloses a very sick side to your > personality. > http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=David+Thomson+nobel&qt_s=Search Just keep showing us the stuff you are made of Paul. You do a greater job of it than I could. Once you do enough reading about the person who wrote that, you'll find his name is Lee and he's either from Japan or The Philippines. He's one of several intelligent, open-minded seekers of the truth out there who have taken the time to read and understand the Aether Physics Model. You seem surprised that there are people who have read, understood, and support the Aether Physics Model. How else do you think I got invited to Imperial College in London to give a talk at the 2006 PIRT conference last fall? >> You may not have noticed all those graphics in >> the papers. But those are computer generated >> images, based upon the Aether Physics Model. > Then the obvious question is were the images created using a graphics > program or by writing custom software? I am referring to writing software > written in a computer language such as C++, not a person using a graphics > program. How about a real science program, like MathCAD 11? > The difference between writing software and using a program is like > comparing QM to basket weaving. Hmmm, okay. And I have just read the rest of your tirade. I have no comment and only hope others on the list have not stopped reading this thread. I think it is quite revealing. Dave
