Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Replies: 154   Last Post: Apr 19, 2011 4:25 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Graham Cooper

Posts: 4,344
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Posted: Apr 11, 2011 7:17 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Apr 12, 7:58 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 02:10:08 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
> <grahamcoop...@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
>
>

> >On Apr 11, 5:41 pm, Government Shill #2 <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 10 Apr 2011 23:46:10 -0700 (PDT), Graham Cooper
>
> >> <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Apr 11, 12:48 pm, GovShill <gov.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Apr 11, 11:06 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Apr 11, 6:08 am, george <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> > > On Apr 11, 6:14 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> >> >> > > > On Sat, 09 Apr 2011 13:51:16 -0700, the following appeared
> >> >> > > > in sci.skeptic, posted by Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>:

>
> >> >> > > > >On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:35:35 -0700 (PDT), the following
> >> >> > > > >appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
> >> >> > > > ><grahamcoop...@gmail.com>:

>
> >> >> > > > >>On Apr 9, 2:19 pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > > > >>> > On Apr 9, 8:24 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> >> >> > > > >>> > > Need I (ahem!) predict that the response will at some point
> >> >> > > > >>> > > involve the deity (or possibly weather ....

>
> >> >> > > > >>> Why do I get the feeling that went straight over his head?
>
> >> >> > > > >>[BOB]
> >> >> > > > >>> There are enough
> >> >> > > > >>> available catastrophes that you should be able to post one
> >> >> > > > >>> next week for the following week.

>
> >> >> > > > >>[BOB] *
> >> >> > > > >>> Need I (ahem!) predict that the response will at some point
> >> >> > > > >>> involve the daily weather ....

>
> >> >> > > > >Nope: "deity". As in (your repeated statement) "GOD (or
> >> >> > > > >GOES) DOESN'T PLAY DICE!". Whatever relevance that has...

>
> >> >> > > > >>[HERC]
> >> >> > > > >>How about a daily weather forecast while we're at it?

>
> >> >> > > > >Already answered; still waiting for *any* verifiable
> >> >> > > > >prediction...

>
> >> >> > > > ><snip irrelevantia>
>
> >> >> > > > Still waiting...
>
> >> >> > > In that case you have a lifelong wait...
>
> >> >> > > The only thing out of that quarter is lies, damned lies and
> >> >> > > unsubstantiated statistics

>
> >> >> > Here are 3 of my premonitions ON RECORD!
>
> >> >> >http://groups.google.com/groups/search?as_usubject=proof+of+god+0202+...
> >> >> > FEB 2 2002 I post PROOF OF GOD 02 02 2002 to a dozen newsgroups
> >> >> > 1 year to the day later the Space Shuttle exploded

>
> >> >> >http://groups.google.com/groups/search?as_usubject=dark-day-monday
> >> >> > DEC 14 2004 A ouigee board warning of global catastrophe - DARK DAY
> >> >> > MONDAY
> >> >> > 2 weeks before the Boxing Day Tsunami killed 100,000 people ON A
> >> >> > SUNDAY

>
> >> >> >http://hercshome.com/my-fault.png
> >> >> > Days before Queensland floods and cyclone.
> >> >> > YOU GET HIT HARD AND IT KEEPS ON COMING (THE RAIN)
> >> >> > Emailed to 50 Queensland Govt. departments

>
> >> >> > -------------
>
> >> >> > I'm not saying it's a simple matter that it's definitive,
> >> >> > but that's 3 of the biggest natural disasters of the last decade
> >> >> > predicted,
> >> >> > and I don't make any predictions other than
> >> >> > the ones that DO show some results.

>
> >> >> Given that a prediction is "a statement made about the future" I'd say
> >> >> you are full of shit. Situation Normal.

>
> >> >> Shill #2
>
> >> >2 days later I explained DARK DAY MONDAY was "predict a catastrophe"
>
> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/aus.tv/msg/1f3d3f27c20f32b2\
>
> >> >Message from discussion DARK DAY MONDAY
>
> >> >----8<-------------------
>
> >> >|-|erc    View profile
> >> >More options Dec 14 2004, 8:21 pm

>
> >> >Newsgroups: aus.tv, sci.skeptic
> >> >From: "|-|erc" <h...@r.c>
> >> >Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 20:21:20 +1000
> >> >Local: Tues, Dec 14 2004 8:21 pm
> >> >Subject: Re: DARK DAY MONDAY
> >> >Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original |
> >> >Report this message | Find messages by this author
> >> >"Monty" <nomeneit...@hotmail.com> wrote in ...

>
> >> >>   "|-|erc" <h...@r.c> wrote in messagenews:327rkgF3fqicnU1@individual.net...
> >> >>   > my Ouigee board is playing up again.... hope its global and not related
> >> >> to me!

>
> >> >>   > Herc
> >> >>   > --
> >> >>   > Capitalism meets Communism ~ limit 1 skyscraper per billionaire

>
> >> >>   It's "Ouija" board - from the French "oui" and German "ja" both meaning
> >> >> "yes".  I'm not picking on you but a lot of people get this wrong.  It's
> >> >> what I use to drive suvvdj nuts.

>
> >> >just taking a stab at the spelling, weegee is even used.
> >> >actually it was  DARKFALZ, DAVID, MONTY, DAVID   dark day mon day
> >> >just after I got the message 'you can predict catastrophe'.  gave me a
> >> >shiver
> >> >reading out the names..

>
> >> >Herc
>
> >> >-----------------------8<------------
>
> >> >DEC 14 - HERC "predict a catastrophe" "DARK DAY MONDAY"
>
> >> >DEC 26 - 100,000 DEAD mid Sunday
>
> >> Nope. Sorry. Don't see any statements made about the future in any of that
> >> bullshit.

>
> >> Maybe I'm not crazy enough?
>
> >just plain stupdity!
>
> But not stupid enough to buy this BS.
>

> >"actually it was  DARKFALZ, DAVID, MONTY, DAVID   dark day mon day
> >just after I got the message 'you can predict catastrophe'"

>
> >GROUPS: aus.tv SCI.SKEPTIC
> >SUBJECT:  DARK DAY MONDAY
> >DATE: 12 DECEMBER 2004
> >TOPIC: Ouija Board message
> >FOLLOW UP POST 14 DEC - *I* can predict catastrophe

>
> >2 WEEKS LATER
> >BOXING DAY TSUNAMI HIT ON SUNDAY

>
> >Any school kid can see it's a valid prediction and a hit.
>
> Let's see...
>
> No mention of the nature of the catastrophe.
> No mention of the time of the catastrophe.


a coming monday

> No mention of the location of the catastrophe.
> No mention of *which* Monday.
>
> Yeah, that's certainly a valid prediction, all right. Not.
>
> Did you only have to take "Stupid 101" to post this kind of
> crap, or was "Advanced Stupid" required?
> --
>
> Bob C.



OK what about when I made an encrypted prediction

http://tinyurl.com/bowditch-prediction

goes to >>

http://groups.google.com/group/aus.tv/browse_thread/thread/5c24116273ec9b4/08008c61c86c96e5?lnk=gst&q=prediction+peter+bowditch#08008c61c86c96e5


Prediction for early 2011
|-|ercules radgray...@yahoo.com aus tv sci skeptic alt prophecies
nostradamus
Peter Bowditch" <myfirstn...@ratbags.com> wrote with your kookiness.
Here is an
image segment of the prediction. http://hercshome.com/petersays/prediction-
bowditch.jpg True so far! Herc.
Nov 30 2010 by |-|ercules - 7 messages - 3 authors


and posted the MD5 of the image file back in October 2010
and stated it would happen early 2011.


The sneak peak of the prediction image was here:

http://hercshome.com/petersays/prediction-bowditch.jpg

The secret prediction image is here:

http://hercshome.com/readnewz-com/prediction1HIDE.png

which should match the first MD5 given in October 2010


OK, so before I post how Peter 'erred then hangs on' early 2011,
are we clear on the time frame and person and the nature of the
prediction?




Date Subject Author
4/3/11
Read SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/3/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/4/11
Read Graham Cooper starts ANOTHER thread in rec.org.mensa
BruceS
4/4/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/4/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/4/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Dingo Bob
4/5/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/5/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/5/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/8/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Sylvia Else
4/8/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
camgirls@hush.com
4/8/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/8/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/8/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
camgirls@hush.com
4/10/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/10/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/10/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/10/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/10/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/12/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/12/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/12/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/13/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Mega
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Virgil
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Virgil
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Dingo Bob
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Dingo Bob
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Dingo Bob
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Dingo Bob
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/16/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Government Shill #2
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
George
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/17/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/18/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/18/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Mick
4/18/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/19/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Mick
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/15/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Brad
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
BruceS
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/14/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Graham Cooper
4/11/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Alex
4/12/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova
4/9/11
Read Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Bob Casanova

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.