Re: Illuminati (was: Re: Paid performance-tor option?)

[Roy Lanek <lanek@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> You watched "Zeitgeist" once too often?

Oh dear ... No, but it's perhaps about time for _you_ to watch ...
http://www.journalof911studies.com/ a bit say, so to have a chance to
discover-once/learn-more-on Galileo, Newton, and Celsius [Fahrenheit
respectively]. (About time ... anno 2008, at the least.)

But be warned, journalof911studies.com collect writings by 1st order
researchers and professionals only, or mainly: on mathematics, physics,
chemistry, crystallography, engineering, etc.^1 These researchers, and
professionals, are NOT hired muddlers, NOT damage-controllers, NOT deniers,
NOR any other lackeys; in fact, they make honor to science in general, and
to the branches in which they are expert in particular. (Though of course,
as in many other sombre circumstances it has happened in history before
already--guess--they have put at risk their own careers.)

Hence, if it's rather occult, comsogonic and esoteric stuff that receives
your preference, then journalof911studies.com would be the wrong place
to "watch" into.

Also, given that you have mentioned FUD [keep reading], maybe you
are confused: journalof911studies.com is related to sites such
popularmechanics.com as, say, Switzerland and New Zealand on the planet--they
are at the antipodes.

> I don't think that this mailing-list is the appropriate place to propagate
> your FUD based conspiracy theories as if they were facts. So would you mind
> to stop it?

Nonetheless, you have followed the path deeply enough ... allow me to sketch
it for you, how it basically looks on Mutt [with threads enabled], right here:

    Alexander Berna   [0.8K ]    | `->
    Scott Bennett     [1.7K ]    `*>
    Roy Lanek         [5.9K ]      `->
    Roy Lanek         [1.2K ]        |->Re: Paid performance-tor option? [2]
    Sven Anderson     [0.9K ]        `->Illuminati (was: Re: Paid performance

Plus, you may be missing how the thing has started ... do you? (And about
the "conspiracy theories," and on how to solve your defect on knowledge and
information, you should have got enough suggestions already.)

/Roy Lanek


     1. From the 'Journal of 9/11 Studies Home':
     http://www.journalof911studies.com/ 

     Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed,
     open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research
     related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are
     represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry,
     Mathematics and Psychology. All content is freely available online. Our
     mission in the past has been to provide an outlet for evidence-based
     research into the events of 9/11 that might not otherwise have been
     published, due to the resistance that many established journals and other
     institutions have displayed toward this topic. The intention was to
     provide a rapid acceptance process with full peer review. That has been
     achieved. It is now our belief that the case for falsity of the official
     explanation is so well established and demonstrated by papers in this
     Journal that there is little to be gained from accepting more papers
     here. Instead we encourage all potential contributors to prepare papers
     suitable for the more established journals in which scientists might
     more readily place their trust. One paper has already been published in
     a mainstream civil engineering journal: Fourteen Points... and more are
     being prepared for submission.

     Etc.


-- 
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSSS . s l a c k w a r e  SSSSSS   air tenang menghanyutkan
SSSSS +------------ linux  SSSSSS    still water runs deep
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS