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.independent

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: 4,237
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: SKEPTICS SHOULD HAVE LABOTAMIES NOT LABORATORIES !!!
Posted: Apr 12, 2011 10:08 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Apr 13, 7:40 am, Brad <goog...@vk2qq.com> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 3:35 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:17:51 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Graham Cooper
> > <grahamcoop...@gmail.com>:

>
> > >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:

>
> > <snip>
>
> > >> >> >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.
>
> > [Crickets...]
>
> > >> No mention of the time of the catastrophe.
> > >a coming monday
>
> > Wow, what a precise time! "A coming Monday"! That's
> > certainly so well-defined that everyone will know what you
> > mean and be able to take precautions! Not.

>
> > >> No mention of the location of the catastrophe.
>
> > [Crickets...]
>
> > >> No mention of *which* Monday.
>
> > [Crickets...]
>
> > >> 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?

>
> > Did you? I'd really like to know...
>
> > >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/5c24116273...
>
> > >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?

>
> > No. Your "time frame" is ridiculous, and the "nature of the
> > prediction" is so vague as to be meaningless. You could as
> > well post a "prediction" that I won't buy your claims
> > without evidence and then claim that your "prediction" was
> > accurate.
> > --

>
> > Bob C.
>
> > "Evidence confirming an observation is
> > evidence that the observation is wrong."
> >                           - McNameless

>
> I can confidently predict the following:
>
> SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN SOMETIME SOON.
>
> There. Now prove me wrong



How many posts in sci.skeptic and/or alt.nostradamus.prophesies are
there stating a catastrophe is imminent and a day is given, less than
2 weeks before a 0.1 megadeath catastrophe?

Now you are saying because I didn't warn which people to move to
higher ground it's not valid??

You're a lying cheating obfuscating reneging deceitful slandering
blasphemous copout Bob, like all skeptics!



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.