On 6/11/2011 10:50 PM, BDK wrote:


That wouldn't surprise me a bit. I wonder if Brad believes in a
perpetual motion machine?


Mook Energy.







--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On 6/11/2011 5:11 PM, Brad Guth wrote:


btw; I only got paid by check, so there's no lack of paper trails on
my part. Although I know of shipyards and few individuals that
accepted cash-cash with no questions asked. Of course I have no way
of knowing if they paid any associated sales or income tax on that
cash-cash loot, but according to rednecks like yourself, they're all
perfectly honest folks exactly like yourself.


So you are now officially *denying* cheating on your
taxes and defrauding the US government of its due?

Noted.









--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On 6/11/2011 9:25 AM, HVAC wrote:


A brief summary of the typical symptoms of PPD includes:

suspiciousness and distrust of others
questioning hidden motives in others
feelings of certainty, without justification or proof, that others are
intent on
harming or exploiting them
social isolation
aggressiveness and hostility
little or no sense of humor


Can it be treated with the proper medications?

Is Brad on any medications?

Would he admit it if he was?


Has anyone noticed that Brad vehemently denied cheating on
his taxes, yet said nary a word of denial his use of
psychotropic medication?

I'm just saying.......





--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On 6/11/2011 11:40 PM, Government Shill #2 wrote:


Apparently I'm a FUD master too?


So now I have to share my crown?

You can be FUD Master Northern Hemisphere.



Kewl!








--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

In message
, Brad
Guth writes
On Jun 11, 5:53*pm, John Vreeland wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 15:49:06 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth









wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:53*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 10:17 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
our ancient TV Tubes work with a bended electrical arc Beam in
vacuum...
...

You are going to have to look to Einstein to even get a "sense" and a
"feel" about the slippery stuff, ether.

It is not like any matter we know, it is completely alien to us. *We do
not possess senses to detect it, and there are no instruments, yet,
which will.

One very un-intuitive quality of ether? *It passes through your vacuum
tubes like the glass envelopes don't even exist, and all other parts of
the tube, for that matter ... but then, I doubt you have a mind which
can even begin to fathom speculation on ether -- so you are pretty much
stuck where you are!

Regards,
JS

If something/anything is moving FTL, such as gravity, then we can't
possibly detect it even though it is still there. *Perhaps the matrix
or flow of ether is simply FTL.

Gravity is not FTL. *It moves at the speed of light. *This is why we
can speak of gravity waves. *If you could observe two black holes
orbiting close to one another from within the plane of their orbit you
would feel the gravitational field change as each one flew by you.
That changing field radiates outward in a spiral shape aligned with
the plane of their orbit.

If the ether exists it is undetectable. *If it exists it must be
relativistic so that you cannot measure your movement through it.
--
My years on the mudpit that is Usnenet have taught me one important
thing: three Creation Scientists can have a serious conversation, if
two of them are sock puppets.

When was this speed of gravity objectively verified as c?

September 8, 2002
Kopeikin measured it as c times 1.06 (but with an error range of plus or
minus 0.21) by observing the gravitational lensing effect of Jupiter.

--
John Ritson

On Jun 12, 3:38*am, John Ritson wrote:
In message
, Brad
Guth writes









On Jun 11, 5:53*pm, John Vreeland wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 15:49:06 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth

wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:53*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 10:17 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
our ancient TV Tubes work with a bended electrical arc Beam in
vacuum...
...

You are going to have to look to Einstein to even get a "sense" and a
"feel" about the slippery stuff, ether.

It is not like any matter we know, it is completely alien to us. *We do
not possess senses to detect it, and there are no instruments, yet,
which will.

One very un-intuitive quality of ether? *It passes through your vacuum
tubes like the glass envelopes don't even exist, and all other parts of
the tube, for that matter ... but then, I doubt you have a mind which
can even begin to fathom speculation on ether -- so you are pretty much
stuck where you are!

Regards,
JS

If something/anything is moving FTL, such as gravity, then we can't
possibly detect it even though it is still there. *Perhaps the matrix
or flow of ether is simply FTL.

Gravity is not FTL. *It moves at the speed of light. *This is why we
can speak of gravity waves. *If you could observe two black holes
orbiting close to one another from within the plane of their orbit you
would feel the gravitational field change as each one flew by you.
That changing field radiates outward in a spiral shape aligned with
the plane of their orbit.

If the ether exists it is undetectable. *If it exists it must be
relativistic so that you cannot measure your movement through it.
--
My years on the mudpit that is Usnenet have taught me one important
thing: three Creation Scientists can have a serious conversation, if
two of them are sock puppets.

When was this speed of gravity objectively verified as c?

September 8, 2002
Kopeikin measured it as c times 1.06 (but with an error range of plus or
minus 0.21) by observing the gravitational lensing effect of Jupiter.

--
John Ritson

Thanks, I'll look into that, because it seems mainstream physics and
whatever science hasn't picked up on this force velocity or
propagation of gravity as being any done deal.

"Several physicists, including Clifford M. Will and Steve Carlip, have
criticized these claims on the grounds that they have allegedly
misinterpreted the results of their measurements. Notably, prior to
the actual transit, Hideki Asada in a paper to the Astrophysical
Journal Letters theorized that the proposed experiment was essentially
a roundabout confirmation of the speed of light instead of the speed
of gravity."

I suppose that more than a few others of sufficient expertise have
interpreted this gravity force velocity in ways that haven't been
accepted or otherwise peer replicated.

How could the speed of light even exist unless gravity wasn't worth at
least twice as fast?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

In message
, Brad
Guth writes
On Jun 12, 3:38Â*am, John Ritson wrote:
In message
, Brad
Guth writes









On Jun 11, 5:53Â*pm, John Vreeland wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 15:49:06 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth

wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:53Â*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 10:17 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
our ancient TV Tubes work with a bended electrical arc Beam in
vacuum...
...

You are going to have to look to Einstein to even get a "sense" and a
"feel" about the slippery stuff, ether.

It is not like any matter we know, it is completely alien to us. Â*We do
not possess senses to detect it, and there are no instruments, yet,
which will.

One very un-intuitive quality of ether? Â*It passes through your vacuum
tubes like the glass envelopes don't even exist, and all other parts of
the tube, for that matter ... but then, I doubt you have a mind which
can even begin to fathom speculation on ether -- so you are pretty much
stuck where you are!

Regards,
JS

If something/anything is moving FTL, such as gravity, then we can't
possibly detect it even though it is still there. Â*Perhaps the matrix
or flow of ether is simply FTL.

Gravity is not FTL. Â*It moves at the speed of light. Â*This is why we
can speak of gravity waves. Â*If you could observe two black holes
orbiting close to one another from within the plane of their orbit you
would feel the gravitational field change as each one flew by you.
That changing field radiates outward in a spiral shape aligned with
the plane of their orbit.

If the ether exists it is undetectable. Â*If it exists it must be
relativistic so that you cannot measure your movement through it.
--
My years on the mudpit that is Usnenet have taught me one important
thing: three Creation Scientists can have a serious conversation, if
two of them are sock puppets.

When was this speed of gravity objectively verified as c?

September 8, 2002
Kopeikin measured it as c times 1.06 (but with an error range of plus or
minus 0.21) by observing the gravitational lensing effect of Jupiter.

--
John Ritson

Thanks, I'll look into that, because it seems mainstream physics and
whatever science hasn't picked up on this force velocity or
propagation of gravity as being any done deal.

"Several physicists, including Clifford M. Will and Steve Carlip, have
criticized these claims on the grounds that they have allegedly
misinterpreted the results of their measurements. Notably, prior to
the actual transit, Hideki Asada in a paper to the Astrophysical
Journal Letters theorized that the proposed experiment was essentially
a roundabout confirmation of the speed of light instead of the speed
of gravity."

I suppose that more than a few others of sufficient expertise have
interpreted this gravity force velocity in ways that haven't been
accepted or otherwise peer replicated.

How could the speed of light even exist unless gravity wasn't worth at
least twice as fast?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet�

There is also the fact that sending probes into the outer solar system,
repeatedly slingshotting around planets involves precise calculations
which take into account the speed of gravity equalling c. If the speed
were to be significantly different, the probes would not end up where
they were supposed to be.

--
John Ritson

On 6/12/2011 1:01 PM, Brad Guth wrote:


Unlike your FUD-master self, I got nothing to gain or lose by fudging
either way.

The folks that I've worked for (including most current clients have
often been Jewish


You kooks are a hoot!

Who the **** knows or even CARES what religion
their clients/customers are? Only a kook does.

Or a racist.







--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On 6/12/2011 1:01 PM, Brad Guth wrote:


Unlike your FUD-master self, I got nothing to gain or lose by fudging
either way.

The folks that I've worked for (including most current clients have
often been Jewish and/or otherwise devoutly faith-based because it
helps them deal with everyday matters and self improvement issues),
know that I'm outspoken and critical about mainstream religion and
politics, whereas yourself remain as a paid brown-nosed clown or
minion that does only whatever your FUD-masters tell you to do, which
obviously doesn't require any individual deductive thinking on your
part.

It's not my fault that so many Jews (republican, democrat or
independent) seem to be getting themselves and others into trouble,
and even so often unable to resolve matters of their personal lives,
homes and yachts that were caused by the very same selfish greed and/
or special interest motivated actions of others they typically have to
associate with.

Most of their boats/yachts are terribly energy inefficient and
technically not even sufficiently seaworthy or all that serviceable
because of the relatively ****-poor decisions made extensively by
others of their own kind.

How is it my fault when I advise clients of a proper set of energy
efficient, relatively smooth and quiet main and auxiliary engines,
along with a proper set of other accessories plus really good
alternators plus a sufficiently sized and good quality battery bank
for their inverter/UPS that'll actually do the job, if they turn to
their good buddies for taking their advise and buying only back-door
stuff as based entirely upon its untaxed dealer/wholesale (where-is as-
is) rock bottom cheapness or superficial look that seldom if ever does
whatever was required, and never is simple to use and/or gets
impossible to service. Do you think it's still my fault that their
boats end up being super spendy, inefficient, unreliable and even
unsafe to use?

If I'd told you a reasonably proper way of doing things and you said
screw that, whereas instead doing it in your usual redneck cheap-ass
know-it-all way because you didn't want anyone as an outsider making
an honest dime off of you. How is it my fault when it either doesn't
integrate properly, is overly complicated and works either
inefficiently or poorly, if not at all?


That was a truly epic kook rant/melt down, Guth.

Now wipe the froth off your chin.......






--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On Jun 12, 10:47*am, John Ritson wrote:
In message
, Brad
Guth writes









On Jun 12, 3:38*am, John Ritson wrote:
In message
, Brad
Guth writes

On Jun 11, 5:53*pm, John Vreeland wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 15:49:06 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth

wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:53*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 10:17 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
our ancient TV Tubes work with a bended electrical arc Beam in
vacuum...
...

You are going to have to look to Einstein to even get a "sense" and a
"feel" about the slippery stuff, ether.

It is not like any matter we know, it is completely alien to us. *We do
not possess senses to detect it, and there are no instruments, yet,
which will.

One very un-intuitive quality of ether? *It passes through your vacuum
tubes like the glass envelopes don't even exist, and all other parts of
the tube, for that matter ... but then, I doubt you have a mind which
can even begin to fathom speculation on ether -- so you are pretty much
stuck where you are!

Regards,
JS

If something/anything is moving FTL, such as gravity, then we can't
possibly detect it even though it is still there. *Perhaps the matrix
or flow of ether is simply FTL.

Gravity is not FTL. *It moves at the speed of light. *This is why we
can speak of gravity waves. *If you could observe two black holes
orbiting close to one another from within the plane of their orbit you
would feel the gravitational field change as each one flew by you.
That changing field radiates outward in a spiral shape aligned with
the plane of their orbit.

If the ether exists it is undetectable. *If it exists it must be
relativistic so that you cannot measure your movement through it.
--
My years on the mudpit that is Usnenet have taught me one important
thing: three Creation Scientists can have a serious conversation, if
two of them are sock puppets.

When was this speed of gravity objectively verified as c?

September 8, 2002
Kopeikin measured it as c times 1.06 (but with an error range of plus or
minus 0.21) by observing the gravitational lensing effect of Jupiter.

--
John Ritson

Thanks, I'll look into that, because it seems mainstream physics and
whatever science hasn't picked up on this force velocity or
propagation of gravity as being any done deal.

"Several physicists, including Clifford M. Will and Steve Carlip, have
criticized these claims on the grounds that they have allegedly
misinterpreted the results of their measurements. Notably, prior to
the actual transit, Hideki Asada in a paper to the Astrophysical
Journal Letters theorized that the proposed experiment was essentially
a roundabout confirmation of the speed of light instead of the speed
of gravity."

I suppose that more than a few others of sufficient expertise have
interpreted this gravity force velocity in ways that haven't been
accepted or otherwise peer replicated.

How could the speed of light even exist unless gravity wasn't worth at
least twice as fast?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

There is also the fact that sending probes into the outer solar system,
repeatedly slingshotting around planets involves precise calculations
which take into account the speed of gravity equalling c. If the speed
were to be significantly different, the probes would not end up where
they were supposed to be.

--
John Ritson

You are confusing the force of gravity with the velocity of gravity.

That’s like confusing the brightness or intensity of a given light
bulb with the speed of light that’s always a variable because the in
between medium is always a variable and/or distorted by the quicker
velocity and/or propagation of gravity.

If a constant magnet force is moving away a 0.1%c; is its force at
any given distance going to be stronger or weaker than a stationary
magnet? (same question applies to gravity)

This science of physics proof pertaining to the velocity of a given
force such as gravity should be accomplished within a physics lab, and
thereby easily peer replicated.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”