02 Jun 12
Originally posted by RJHindsIf you hate him, that automatically makes him my friend.
Didn't I inform you that Dr. Hugh Ross is a false teacher. But I said even he sees evidence of fulfilled prophecies in the Holy Bible. Where did I endorse his interpretations? But the prophecies are there for you to see and there are accurate interpretations available. If you refuse to look for them, then this is all I can say for you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlBifX0H3yg&feature=related
02 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsso your criticism here is that I am "trying to speed read" my OWN post and I am "not very good at it"?
Your post just above mine.
What is your objection to me “speed reading” my own post?
And why would you think I am “speed reading” it whatever that is supposed to mean?
I had said:
I don't refuse to look at the link. I have just seen the link. It is just a video giving a boring song about the “blinding light”.
What the hell is that to do with evidence of fulfilled prophecies in the Holy Bible? 😛
How the hell does that song represent “the prophecies” that “are there for you to see” and with “accurate interpretations available”? 😛
Perhaps you can show me something that is at least vaguely RELEVANT?
and not only do you not answer my two questions above but you do NOT give me something vaguely relevant but just talk about “speed reading” instead 😛
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by humyNow be honest. You know what I mean. You can't be that stupid.
so your criticism here is that I am "trying to speed read" my OWN post and I am "not very good at it"?
What is your objection to me “speed reading” my own post?
And why would you think I am “speed reading” it whatever that is supposed to mean?
I had said:
[quote] I don't refuse to look at the link. I have just seen the link. It is just a video giving ...[text shortened]... ou do NOT give me something vaguely relevant but just talk about “speed reading” instead 😛
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewhen i get a reply, you'll be the first to know.
actually my original assertion was taken from a book lent to me by a geologist. I am
not in possession of that book anymore, never the less, he confirmed the fact. I have
posted in oceanography forums asking for any references which will confirm the
details, for example,
http://www.topix.com/forum/science/oceanography
when i get a reply, you'll be the first to know.
Really?! You didn't post this -
I am a qualified atmospheric scientists and also a Professor in geology including ocean-floor geology.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that, whatever you exactly mean by airborne 'pollutants', no airborne 'pollutant' of the specific types that combine with sea-salt aerosols from ocean spray and which eventually reach the ocean floor are ever 'filtered' through hydrothermal vents in any significant quantity compared to were most of it goes for such a type of 'pollutant' would consist of heavier particles than mere gas particles and such particles that reach the sea floor would generally just settle on the bottom and come part of the sediment that can eventually change into sedimentary rock.
03 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobNo i did not post that, some professor in Port Talbot did, what I meant is when i get a
[b]when i get a reply, you'll be the first to know.
Really?! You didn't post this -
I am a qualified atmospheric scientists and also a Professor in geology including ocean-floor geology.[/b]
I can tell you with absolute certainty that, whatever you exactly mean by airborne 'pollutants', no airborne 'pollutant' of the specific types that com nd come part of the sediment that can eventually change into sedimentary rock.
response which confirms my theory, you'll be the first to know. Tell me PK, what do
you think will happen to pollutants that are subjected to the pressure and heat (400
Celsius) of hydrothermal vents?
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI see.
No i did not post that, some professor in Port Talbot did, what I meant is when i get a
response which confirms my theory, you'll be the first to know. Tell me PK, what do
you think will happen to pollutants that are subjected to the pressure and heat (400
Celsius) of hydrothermal vents?
As for your question, i don't know and i don't care. It's your theory, we wait for you empirical evidence.
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by Proper Knobyou dont care? ouch, arrow to the heart or what? when i am collecting my Nobel prize
I see.
As for your question, i don't know and i don't care. It's your theory, we wait for you empirical evidence.
for science, then you will be forced to acknowledge my special theory of hydrothermal
vents.
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell there is nothing contained on the internet to back up your theory, and you have now had a professor of ocean floor geology tell you he/she knows of no such system. I think we mat be waiting a long time for your 'fandango theory' to be acknowledged.
you dont care? ouch, arrow to the heart or what? when i am collecting my Nobel prize
for science, then you will be forced to acknowledge my special theory of hydrothermal
vents.
03 Jun 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobOn the contrary i have found evidence that magnesium gets filtered by some elements
Well there is nothing contained on the internet to back up your theory, and you have now had a professor of ocean floor geology tell you he/she knows of no such system. I think we mat be waiting a long time for your 'fandango theory' to be acknowledged.
in the sedimentary rocks, all I need to do is get the Proff to admit that pollutants would
be vitrified and i am vindicated! Fandango theory? sigh its lamentable that great theories
like Einsteins and mine are condemned to obscurity when first published by an
unappreciative public.
the fact of the matter is dear PK, the ocean filters pollutants, even airborne pollutants.
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWow, I did not know you are on a par with Einstein.
On the contrary i have found evidence that magnesium gets filtered by some elements
in the sedimentary rocks, all I need to do is get the Proff to admit that pollutants would
be vitrified and i am vindicated! Fandango theory? sigh its lamentable that great theories
like Einsteins and mine are condemned to obscurity when first published by an
unappreciative public.
03 Jun 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieits lamentable that great theories like Einsteins and mine are condemned to obscurity
On the contrary i have found evidence that magnesium gets filtered by some elements
in the sedimentary rocks, all I need to do is get the Proff to admit that pollutants would
be vitrified and i am vindicated! Fandango theory? sigh its lamentable that great theories
like Einsteins and mine are condemned to obscurity when first published by an ...[text shortened]... c.
the fact of the matter is dear PK, the ocean filters pollutants, even airborne pollutants.
Taxi for Mr Carrobie!!!!