knews4u2chew@ wrote:
> Ravi's Duplication of a Meyer Cell.
> /phpBB2/ ?t=1602&sid=3d25b543fda71e2f5b40c4bf11448942
>
Of coarse, this is bullshit, but your previous post:
/acrobat/
Needs peer review.
Do you know what that is? A claim of 100 years of observations,
contradicted...
Do you understand that all hell would break loose? Do you understand
that? I've been posting the implications for years. Do you get it?
Don't claim otherwise just because you 'believe'.......