Kenneth Carrigan wrote:
> Jer,
> I know in some newsgroups, most magazines and professional periodicals
> there is requirement that cross posting does not happen. I am sure there
> are many reasons why this is a requirement.. but wondering what your
> feelings are on this list... for such cross postings?
> v/r Ken Carrigan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis C. Lee <atech@ix.netcom.com>
> To: freenrg-l@eskimo.com <freenrg-l@eskimo.com> KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net
> <KeelyNet@DallasTexas.net> vortex-L@eskimo.com <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
> Date: Friday, October 30, 1998 12:43 AM
> Subject: CIA? This is for you!
>
> >Hi;
> >
> >Some one just told me that CIA crawl all over these lists. Hey CIA people,
> >this is for you. Do you have your spots all picked out in the underground
> >cities? If not, your gonna be stuck up here on top just like the rest of us,
> >if and when the poles tip! Even if you do have reservations, what are you
> >going to do when you come topside and see everything dead and destroyed? It
> >ain't going to be much fun then either. Will all of your family and friends
> >get admission to the underground city? You can deny the possibility but that
> >won't stop the truth of the matter. You will die just like the rest of us,
> >or you will wish you were dead. Your fun and games will end up killing us
> >all. Get your butts in gear and get us ANTIGRAVITY ICECUBE CUTTER/TRANSPORTS
> >so we can start trimming the South Pole Icecap or you will die like dogs
> >just as the rest of us will. Time is running out...
> >
> >If I die because of your stupidity, I will be so upset, I will find some way
> >of coming back... :(
> >Dennis C. Lee
> >
> >
> >> > I'm really sick of this nonsense and
> >> > appalled at the ignorance of elementary
> >> > physics that allows it to propagate.
> >> > NOTHING will twist the rotational axis of
> >> > the earth perceptibly except collision
> >> > with another heavenly object having
> >> > enormous mass.
> >>
> >>Well, I'm afraid when you read this you're going to get even sicker.
> >>
> >>My elementary geophysics tells me that the the earth is very, very, nearly
> >>a perfect sphere. The much talked about equatorial bulges or "oblate
> >>spheroid" shape is extremely small compared with the size of the earth.
> >>
> >>Then, my elementary physics tells me that a perfect spinning sphere has
> >>*NO* gyroscopic stability. Nada, none at all. If the earth were a perfect
> >>sphere, after a few years a gang of fleas all farting in the same direction
> >>could tilt the earth off its axis. Of course it's not quite a perfect
> >>sphere. So how does that tiny equatorial bulge stack up against the ice
> >>packs anyway? Is much of that equatorial bulge made up of seawater? I'd
> >>really be interested in a good explanation of the physics of the stability
> >>of a spinning *elastic* sphere (perhaps fluid filled, like a near-spherical
> >>water balloon for instance). I'd think its centrifugal bulge would
> >>contribute to stability as expected, but is it truly the same as a rigid
> >>solid having a fixed equatorial bulge? How would such a fluid system react,
> >>for instance, to a field which applied force to all the elements (molecules
> >>or whatever) of the system all at once? The earth, even the solid rock,
> >>might as well be considered a near-fluid when taken altogether as a planet.
> >>
> >>There may be other forces between the earth and sun, or even the other
> >>planets, that loom large but unknown against the simple electrogravitic
> >>(plain old gravity in straight radiated 'as in electrostatic' lines).
> >>Obviously electrostatic forces aren't small, and even gravity itself might
> >>have some glitches to it involving large spinning masses. I know the
> >>magnetogravitic effect from such systems is thought to be vanishingly
> >>small, but that might not be the whole story. Remember "Jove rules the
> >>heavens", and there's physical evidence to back the claim (angular momentum
> >>of the solar system). Would that be a clue?
> >>
> >>The ancients seemed terribly intersted in tracking the heavens, and
> >>evidence indicates they experienced enormous relief and celebration when
> >>observations showed that things were continuing to move in their expected
> >>paths. Why this paranoia about celectial objects reappearing in their
> >>proper places? Don't they always? Why would anyone think it could be
> >>otherwise? Maybe they knew something we don't? Maybe they or their
> >>ancestors had certain bad experiences in this regard?
> >>
> >>I'm not buying into any of this 5/5/2000 or polar shift stuff without any
> >>good evidence either. But I'm not so sure I can dismiss all of it out of
> >>hand without some good answers to some of these other questions.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Tall Ships
> >http://pw1.netcom.com/~atech/tallship.html
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> > with the body text: leave Keelynet
> > list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> > http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave Keelynet
> list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------