Let's not drag this on ad nauseum....in earlier posts relating to the
definition of the earth's magnetic poles, I posted NUMEROUS URLs where
the standard definition was defined and agreed upon by many, many people
including universities and researchers.....
Rawls and Davis clearly state in their books that it is THEIR definition
which is OPPOSITE from the one accepted as true by orthodox teachings.
And they clearly warn that if you do not USE their identification, you
will get opposite result than what is intended.
John, in every post that I have seen you make regarding this subject,
you have yet to provide ONE URL to back up your contention...if you
cannot, then please be quiet and live with your own definition rather
than draggging it onto the list without ever providing anything to back
it up other than what you say.
Simply not good enough to pronounce something as fact and never be
required to back it up...at the very least say it is YOUR OPINION, then
drop it and let us get on to other topics.
John Berry wrote:
>
> The point is that if "WE" start calling the north pole of a magnet what everyone
> else undisputedly calls the south it makes things very complex because EVERYTHING
> must be marked as to if it is technically correct or how it probably should be.
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------