Where do all the creationists go?

how about defacing my own work then? like this? "duh" was the most used phrase in my 8th grade class. You all will have to wait as I work this refaced letter between Maxwell's variables and Gladsyhev's classical phenomenology. Not every thing I do can be instantly replyed to.

The only problem I have is the Cantor missed the proverbial lash funnel. To illustrate Barmin in a non spacial dimention is to free Goden from the bottom of your last paste. Eye, and not I was not red before. Back to the drawing board and Wright it right not that Wright was right before your interpretations.

we shall see. I am reading "Sequences" by H.Halberstam and KF Roth from Oxford at the Clarendon Press and I am not yet unconvinced that Cantor's (not Dauben's) point set density can not not be described in terms of my drawn intersection of a Croizat track and Wright distance empirics as serially arranged sequences and have this measure approximate the Gladyshev law. In any respect I would not have much more to say about Woodger's language and biology if THAT turns into some pure math. Frist comes the inuition. now, I must get to workiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiNG. Thanks for the input(all).

I thought poorly of this topic when it was first started.Also, such as through the Croizat Track / Wright's Isolation by distance topic, I would like to get greater focus on Brad's output. It's my opinion that neither Brad nor the various involved topics are well served by having Brad scatter his input all over the place.Brad - let's try to get your statements focused into a certain limited number of topics.This topic closed.Adminnemooseus