Re: ZeroPoint/Overunity Devices

John Berry ( antigrav@ihug.co.nz )
Mon, 20 Jul 1998 16:36:15 -0700

Jerry W. Decker wrote:

> Hi John!
>
> Exactly the point, there is no CHEMICAL AEther, thought there is a
> chemical ETher.

What? you are denying Mendeleeff's chemical concept of the aether/ether out
of hand?I don't think that is what you mean right? You are saying that you
prefer Aether to Ether because it #1 sounds and looks better and can not be
confused with the anesthetic.
I prefer Aether also but I think few are going to think you are talking
about the anesthetic.

> That's why we need to stick with the correct terms, to avoid confusion,
> though some will pick it to death...<g>.....bottomline, how to tap
> aether for practical purposes, all else doesn't matter, well, to me
> anyway.