"Jerry W. Decker" wrote:
> Hi John et al!
>
> 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/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------