Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC haters.

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:29 am

Since Mr. Mozina has not provided any arguments of substance that I might need to address, I can now complete Part II of The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland…
November 22, 2015 at 8:51 PM


It's now been 8 full months and counting since his promise, but we still have no additional works of fiction about Birkeland's solar model by Tom Bridgman. What's the problem Bridgman, you couldn't find anything to counter that solar wind paper that I handed you by Birkeland which clearly demonstrates that your diagram of his solar wind model is completely FUBAR? Don't tell us that you couldn't find anything published to support your erroneous nonsense?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Jun 29, 2016 12:19 pm

Apparently Brian Koberlein's blind bigotry toward EU theory, Koberlein's patently false accusations, his unethical lack of citations, and his propensity to simply ban anyone and everyone that catches him in a lie isn't limit to poor Wal Thornhill. Evidently Koberlein pulls his same unethical crap on everyone. Don't take it personally Wal, Brian is just incapable of telling the truth, he never provides proper citations, and his irrational bigotry extends to the whole of the EU/PC community, not just you personally. :)

http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.c ... rlein.html
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:18 am

http://dealingwithcreationisminastronomy.blogspot.com/

Sunday, August 30, 2015
Electric Universe: The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland. I.


Any wages as to whether we will go a full year without Bridgman's fixing his FUBAR solar wind diagram of Birkeland's *single* cathode solar model, and without seeing Bridgman's second promised work of fiction on Birkeland's solar model(s)? :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Online EU/PC bigotry

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Jul 06, 2016 11:51 pm

My conversations with Brian Koberlein on his blog, and my conversations with "Reality Check" (Koberlein's personal sock puppet?) over at ChristianForums got me to thinking about EU/PC bigotry as it's being practiced on the internet. Some folks like Brian Koberlein have taken the "sleaze" factor of EU/PC bigotry to a whole new level, by willfully and intentionally misrepresenting the statements and beliefs of three different EU/PC advocates, Thornhill, Scott and Findlay.

Nobody gets into "science" with the intent of impeding it's progress, but that's exactly what people like Koberlein and Bridgman are doing when they *willfully* and *maliciously* misrepresent EU/PC theories and the statements of EU/PC proponents. What actually motivates people like Koberlein and Bridgman to misrepresent the statements of every EU/PC advocate on the internet? Do they even have any sense of morality or "scientific ethics" at all?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Interesting reactions

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:01 pm

Bridgman's reaction to getting publicly busted and being called out on this forum has been to go completely silent with respect to new blog entries (as he promised), and yet he has chosen to leave his same misinformation about Birkeland's beliefs on the internet.

Koberlein on the other hand continues to post quite prolifically to his blog, and yet like Bridgman, he's also chosen to leave his blatant misinformation about Wal's neutrino predictions from 2014 on the internet, even after being corrected by multiple individuals over the years, and banning every single one of us for trying to fix his error. It's rather obvious that neither of these two individuals have any semblance of a moral scientific conscience since they both continue to willfully misrepresent the 'physics' of EU/PC theory.

Congrats to Bridgman at least for going a full year without spewing *more* misinformation about EU/PC theory, which is clearly more than can be said for Koberlein.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Dec 26, 2016 8:55 pm

For the record, I finally got around to reading Electric Universe by Thornhill and Talbott. For anyone paying attention to historical accuracy and integrity in science, on page 70 of their book which Koberlein claimed to have used as a reference, you'll find the following statements about *their actual* beliefs about neutrino emissions from the sun, their predicted emission location, and their predicted variability as it relates to sunspot activity:

Neutrino deficiency.

Solar physicists have acknowledged for decades that the Sun’s output of neutrinos, a by-product of nuclear fusion, is about 1/3 of that expected in the standard solar model. Three types or ‘flavors’ of neutrinos have been identified, and recent attempts to solve the problem require unwarranted assumptions about neutrino ‘change of flavor’ en route from the center of the Sun. An electric Sun, however, can generate all flavors of neutrinos in heavy element synthesis at its surface. Therefore, it requires no assumptions about ‘changing flavors’ to hide the deficit.

Neutrino variability.

The neutrino output varies inversely with the surface sunspot cycle. Were they produced in the nuclear ‘furnace’ at the center of the Sun, this relationship would be inconceivable, since solar physicists calculate that it takes about 200,000 years for the energy of internal fusion to affect the surface. In the electrical model, more and larger sunspots mean less ‘lightning’ at the surface, where the nuclear reactions occur. Thus, the decline in neutrinos with increasing sunspot number is expected.


So there you have it. This is direct written evidence that Koberlein's claim about Thornhill's solar model predicting *no* neutrinos is simply wrong, way wrong, and ridiculously wrong. Koberlein claimed to be doing a critique of the solar model that is promoted by Thornhill and Talbott, yet the authors clearly *do* predict the emission of neutrinos from near the surface of the sun. Never did Koberlein produce any actual page number or paragraph where Findlay or anyone else predicted "no" neutrinos from any "electric sun" model. Brian Koberlein simply lied through his teeth on his blog and then he repeatedly and deliberately refused to correct his error even after four different individuals pointed it out. He still has the gall to leave his erroneous and slanderous hit piece online. How unprofessional can Brian Koberlein possibly be anyway?

By the way, even though I prefer Birkeland's solar model over Juergen's solar model, I highly recommend the Electric Universe by Thornhill and Talbott. It's really well written and it provides a nice introduction to electrical currents in space.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:39 pm

Well, I see that Brian Koberlein is at it again, blatantly engaging himself in professional misconduct. This time he is unethically and publicly smearing EU/PC theory by association:

https://briankoberlein.com/2017/03/05/eris-brown-dwarf/

I started reading through this article:

Yesterday I got an interesting request from a therapist. She works with folks who are terrified that some large object like Nibiru is going to collide with Earth and kill us all, known as cosmophobia. Unfortunately there’s a lot of YouTubers out there that say these fears are quite reasonable, including “a physicist” who claims that Eris is a brown dwarf heading our way.


So basically he's doing a hit piece on Niribu claims, including a specific one put forth by a specific individual from a specific video on youtube, apparently this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoM0eaExR6M

Ok, so I continue reading and I get to these specific claims made by Koberlein:

According to A. Physicist, Brown Dwarf stars are electric bodies surrounded by a cloud of gas, so let’s start with that. In astronomy (like any other science) definitions matter.


So let’s go back to the claim of A. Physicist that Eris is an electric body surrounded by a cloud of gas. The electric part is based on the electric universe model, which I’ve debunked before.


Emphasis mine. So did Mr. Christopher Mark Potter, AKA A. Physicist actually make any such claims during his video? Hell no!

It turns out that never once did "A. physicist/Christopher Mark Potter make either of those claims in the video. Never once did his five-minute video even mention the concept, the notion, or the phrase "electric body/bodies".

Koberlein flat out lied about that too. Why would a professional astrophysicist intentionally misrepresent the facts? Apparently, Koberlein did it just so that he could smear EU/PC theory by association.

Now it's perfectly possible that Mr. Potter happens to favor EU/PC theory, but he absolutely, positively never makes that claim in his video. His only reasoning for it being a brown dwarf was because the atmosphere was not well defined in figure 3. Never once did he mention anything about electricity or electric sun theory at all.

Koberlein then goes on to site himself bashing on EU theory while associating Niribu claims with EU/PC theory. What a complete ass. I've seen a lack of ethics in my life, but I've never met anyone who willingly misrepresents the statements of everyone the way that Koberlein does. He intentionally and blatantly lied about what Thornhill's model predicts with respect to neutrinos. Koberlien lied on his blog again about what Findlay actually said about neutrinos too. He publicly lied yet again in that Eris article when he claims that Potter/A. Physicist even mentioned the term "electric body". Koberlein is simply a flat out liar without a lick of ethics to his name.

Sheesh. No wonder the mainstream is stuck in the dark ages of physics. They are a bunch of ignorant and gullible sheeple who are led by pathological liars.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Tue Mar 14, 2017 9:47 am

https://briankoberlein.com/2013/11/08/s ... -electric/

I thought I'd point out all the BS in this hit piece that Koberlein did on Alfven's cosmology model in 2013. Apparently Koberlein has been consistently and intentionally misrepresenting EU/PC theory for quite a few years before I even heard of him, or read any of his nonsense.

The Alfvén-Klein model is an alternative to the big bang, so it doesn’t predict the cosmic microwave background. The CMB not only exists, but agrees with the big bang model.


Has Koberlein *ever* told the truth about any aspect of EU/PC theory? Eddington did a *napkin* calculation on the background temperature of spacetime which was based on the kinetic energy of starlight scattering in the dust of space. He nailed the actual background temperature of space to within a 1/2 of a degree with that method. *Any* and *every* cosmology theory that contains any stars and dust since Eddington has "predicted" a background temperature in the microwave range. This is another of Koberlein's flat out lies. Apparently he simply cannot help himself when it comes to misrepresenting every aspect of EU/PC theory, and misrepresenting historical scientific facts.

The irony is that the first "prediction" of the background temperature of space based upon big bang theory was off by a whole order of magnitude. It took big bangers three or four attempts to get any closer than Eddington. They had to continuously modify their claims simply to get a postdicted fit.

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pr ... 2N3ASS.PDF

If matter and antimatter existed in pockets, the interaction of their edges would produce tremendous x-rays. This doesn’t agree with the x-ray observations we have.


Well, this isn't necessarily a "lie" like most of Koberlein's BS, but it's not entirely accurate either. We do observe a higher proportion of gamma rays near the core of our own galaxy. Alfven's "ambiplasma" would indeed emit gamma ray anihillation signatures, and we do see an increase in gamma rays in some regions. We see high energy "bubbles" inside our own galaxy that are today "assumed" to be related to supernova shock waves. I tend to think there aren't enough enough annihilatoin signatures in space to justify his concept of a mixture of matter/antimatter in the same galaxy, but that's just my personal opinion. I'd also point out that antimatter might dominate in regions that are simply not visible to us from Earth.

Then there is the fact that the Alfvén-Klein model doesn’t make any predictions about the abundances of hydrogen and helium in the universe, where the big bang model does.


It doesn't have to make any predictions about the abundance figures of the universe because it's not a "creation" (of mattrer) mythology like BB theory. Matter and antimatter in all it's present forms could have existed eternally in Alfven's model.

Over and over, the Alfvén-Klein model fails to agree with observation. So it goes to the recycle bin.


I'm noticing a distinct pattern from Koberlein. He simply flat out *lies* about what the EU/PC model 'predicts', and then he "debunks" his own strawman. How dishonest can I guy get anyway? This guy calls himself a "professional"? What a jerk! Well, at least we can all see that he's a complete EU/PC bigot, and we can see that his bigotry is aimed at the entire EU/PC community, not just any one specific idea related to EU/PC theory.

The irony of Koberlein's next few comments simply blew up the irony meter.

Supporters of the electric universe model will argue that these discrepancies can be overcome by modifying the theory. If you tweak this or that in the model then it can be made to agree with experimental observation. But tweaking a model to make it fit is a weak argument.


Talk about pots and kettles. Eddington wouldn't have to "modity" his background temperuature calculation very much to get it to match the correct background temperature of spacetime. He was already within a half of a degree and he didn't even know that other galaxies existed!

On the other hand, big bangers had to modify their 'background prediction' *repeatedly* to even get it any closer than Eddington did on his very first try based on ordinary scattering of starlight.

Big bangers have been modifying their theory continuously since I was a child. There was no "dark energy" in big bang theory when I was a kid. That was a *postdicted fit* to match SN1A data, and now "dark energy" makes up nearly 70 percent of their entire theory! Dark matter "preditions'" all went up in smoke, so they keep modifying the "predictions'.

Using a model to make a clear prediction is a stronger one. The big bang model predicted the cosmic microwave background, which was then observed.


Ya, but the first "prediction" of BB theory was off by an entire order of magnitude. Had they not kept modifying all the variables (like age), they wouldn't have *ever* got any closer than Eddington. What a completely bunch of nonsense.

The model predicted the abundances of light elements correctly.


Only by adding "magic matter" and by remaining in pure denial of all the errors in their mass estimates of galaxies. Nevermind all the "space expansion' and dark energy influences too.

The distribution of galaxies in the universe matches the big bang.


Except where it has "holes" and 'ridges" and those hemispheric variations that defy Guth's claims about homogeniety. This is another case of pure denial of any and all *errors* in their own predictions. Guth didn't predict hemispheric variations in the CMD. What BS.

The big bang model works naturally,


This has to be the single biggest "lie" that Koberlein has ever told! :) "Naturally"? WTF? There's nothing "natural" about LCMD theory, maybe five percent at *best case*! At *least* 95 percent of it is "supernatural" by design. Nothing like "space expansion" has a "natural" effect on photon momentum in a lab. Nothing "natural" showed up at LHC to explain their exotic matter claims. Even the five percent of their math related to real plasma is pure *pseudoscience* according to the author of MHD theory. There's literally nothing *natural* about LCDM theory, *nothing*! It's nothing but supernatural nonsense on a stick! What a huge lie.

while the electric universe model must be tweaked and modified every time new cosmological evidence comes to light.


This is just pure hypocrisy on a stick. *Every* cosmology theory is "modified" over time because of new observations. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. LCDM proponents have been doing it since they first *botched* their first attempt at a background temperature by a whole order of magnitude. They did it again with 'dark energy", and with exotic forms of matter too. Koberlein is both a liar and a complete hypocrite.

Scientific models live or die based on experimental evidence.


If that were actually true, then all those billions of dollars spent on all those failed "tests" of dark matter would have killed LCDM theory by now. Scientific models live or die based on their popularity over time. Period.

The only 'trend' in science is that empirical physics ultimately *stomps* on supernaturalism, so EU/PC theory is going to eventually become more popoular over time. It's inevitable.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:05 pm

briankoberlein wrote:Yesterday I got an interesting request from a therapist. She works with folks who are terrified that some large object like Nibiru is going to collide with Earth and kill us all, known as cosmophobia. Unfortunately there’s a lot of YouTubers out there that say these fears are quite reasonable, including “a physicist” who claims that Eris is a brown dwarf heading our way.


This is a strange claim in many ways.
In some new-age UFO-communities, Nibiru is just a different planet.
I don't support the theory, but I never read the claim that it might collide with Earth.
They rather talk about aliens from Nibiru saving Earth.

What I do see is fear caused by mainstream articles about meteors or comets colliding with earth.
Or about the sun growing and swallowing earth.
Also people are afraid of a black hole swallowing Earth.
This fear is caused by the mainstream science, and many Hollywood movies.

The statement in the article is so far off, that I suspect that either the therapist or
the writer of the story have mixed up some major parts of the actual story.
But knowing some other "sceptics" I find it even possible that the writer has just made up parts of the story.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 699
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:43 am

Zyxzevn wrote:The statement in the article is so far off, that I suspect that either the therapist or
the writer of the story have mixed up some major parts of the actual story.
But knowing some other "sceptics" I find it even possible that the writer has just made up parts of the story.


Considering Koberlein's track record, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find out that he made up the whole thing. He certainly made up any connection between the video in question and EU/PC theory, so it's highly likely he simply made up the therapist in his head too.

If Koberlein is representative of the mainstream in terms of their understanding of Alfven's work, or Birkeland's work, it's no wonder why they are still living in the dark ages of physics. Koberlein is clueless by willful intent, and he is completely unethical to boot. I've never seen anyone with less ethics, or with a more pitiful understanding of empirical physics.

If his professional buddies were any better, they'd have corrected his errors by now.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Brian Koberlein blows up the irony meter....

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:45 pm

https://briankoberlein.com/2017/06/22/citation-needed/

I get a lot of email from folks with pseudoscience claims. It could be that the Earth is actually flat, or that the Sun is powered by electricity, or....


I can't imagine a more ironic article coming from the man who steadfastly *refuses* to provide a citation where Thornhill or Scott ever claimed that any electric sun model is predicted to emit "no neutrinos". The only page number citations which Brian Koberlein provided to *Findlay's* pdf file didn't even mention the term "neutrino", and Findlay was describing *mainstream* beliefs about brown dwarfs, not even an electric sun model. Irony overload. What a bunch of pure nonsense. Not only did Brian Koberlein flat out lie about the real neutrino predictions the electric solar model of Scott and Thornhill, Koberlein has also revealed himself to be a first class hypocrite for refusing to cite any citations! Way to go Brian.....

https://briankoberlein.com/2014/02/25/t ... -universe/

The EU model predicts the Sun should produce no neutrinos.


FYI, a citation is still needed to support this bogus statement of yours Brian. You're just too lazy to provide it, like you're accusing others of being. More irony overload.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Brian has to be aware of his BS.

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:46 pm

It's pretty much impossible for Brian Koberlein to be unaware of his own BS. He spends an inordinate amount of time both belittling EU/PC theory, and *misrepresenting* EU/PC to the public. Based on the number of comments, his "hit piece" on Thornhill was *by far* the most read and commented blog entry on his website, and yet he's taken no steps whatsoever to correct his errors.

He can't even seem to resist taking unethical cheap shots at EU/PC theory every few months, like he did this month when he compared EU/PC theory to "pseudoscience", and back in March when he put words in some random guy's mouth (A. Physicist) while falsely associating Nibiru claims with EU/PC theory. The author of the video he was responding to never even mentioned EU/PC theory. Koberlein simply made that up in his head.

So far this year Koberlein has twice gone out of his way to badmouth a theory that he either A) doesn't even begin to understand, and/or B) simply misrepresents intentionally. That Nibiru nonsense from March *requires* Koberlein to simply be dishonest because the author of that video didn't say a word about EU/PC theory, yet Koberlein used that youtube video to launch into an EU/PC tirade anyway, and to falsely associate EU/PC theory with the concept of Nibiru.

The mainstream sat back the whole time and let him get away with that nonsense, and in fact they all encouraged him. It's hard to have any sympathy at all for the mainstream when they are so blatantly intellectually dishonest and so professionally unethical about presenting competing ideas. Koberlein and those who commented on that Thornhill hit piece should be ashamed of themselves. What a bunch of dishonest nonsense. If Koberlein wishes to talk about "pseudoscience' he need look no further than "magnetic reconnection" theory as explained by Hannes Alfven himself:

B. Magnetic Merging — A Pseudo-Science

Since then I have stressed in a large number of papers the danger of using the frozen-in concept. For example, in a paper "Electric Current Structure of the Magnetosphere" (Alfvén, 1975), I made a table showing the difference between the real plasma and "a fictitious medium" called "the pseudo-plasma," the latter having frozen in magnetic field lines moving with the plasma. The most important criticism of the "merging" mechanism of energy transfer is due to Heikkila (1973) who with increasing strength has demonstrated that it is wrong. In spite of all this, we have witnessed at the same time an enormously voluminous formalism building up based on this obviously erroneous concept. Indeed, we have been burdened with a gigantic pseudo-science which penetrates large parts of cosmic plasma physics. The monograph CP treats the field-line reconnection (merging) concept in 1.3, 11.3, and 11.5. We may conclude that anyone who uses the merging concepts states by implication that no double layers exist.

A new epoch in magnetospheric physics was inaugurated by L. Lyons and D. Williams' monograph (1985). They treat magnetospheric phenomena systematically by the particle approach and demonstrate that the fluid dynamic approach gives erroneous results. The error of the latter approach is of a basic character. Of course there can be no magnetic merging energy transfer.

I was naive enough to believe that such a pseudo-science would die by itself in the scientific community, and I concentrated my work on more pleasant problems. To my great surprise the opposite has occurred; the "merging" pseudo-science seems to be increasingly powerful. Magnetospheric physics and solar wind physics today are no doubt in a chaotic state, and a major reason for this is that some of the published papers are science and part pseudoscience, perhaps even with a majority for the latter group.

In those parts of solar physics which do not deal with the interior of the Sun and the dense photospheric region (fields where the frozen-in concept may be valid), the state is even worse. It is difficult to find theoretical papers on the low density regions which are correct. The present state of plasma astrophysics seems to be almost completely isolated from the new concepts of plasma which the in situ measurements on space plasma have made necessary (see Section VIII).

I sincerely hope that the increased interest in the study of double layers — which is fatal to this pseudoscience — will change the situation. Whenever we find a double layer (or any other E ll # 0) we hammer a nail into the coffin of the "merging" pseudo-science.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby crudebuster » Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:33 am

It's like a boat that is sinking but keeps throwing water at other boats so they think they'll sink too.

I hope to be still alive when all the stupid bunch of popscidiots swallow their idiotic hypocritic BS claim by claim.

For the moment they're already having some giant gas indigestion with Jupiter's electrical readings and cackling another volley of stupid assumptions involving nothing but mass and gravity again.

They seem to be magneto-electro-phobic.
crudebuster
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 2:24 pm

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:55 am

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/64 ... ig-science

LOL! I'm almost tempted to spend $100.00 just so I can "Ask the Astronomer" on video at Green Bank to quote someone from the EU/PC community who ever predicted 'no neutrinos' from any EU/PC solar model and how his bogus claim on his blog squares with his claim to present science honestly and without hype, so that he has to post his video answer on his blog and on Facebook. :)

Do you think he'd do it? :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Metryq » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:01 pm

That's a very dark matter, Michael. Have you considered the gravity of this course of action?
User avatar
Metryq
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests