Re: plate tectonics is based on what assumptions?

In article <qvd6g290msamkun91smp2vt1bjm53f7i8j@xxxxxxx>,
J. Taylor <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 9 Sep 2006 14:24:50 -0400, "George" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


How is it a lie? I've challenged you to present verifiable physical
evidence that the continents were all together in the Pacific 200 million
years ago, and also explained to you in detail how to go about doing it.
You have yet to reply with one shred of coroborating evidence, and can

This was like four days ago, right? And at the time said it was
something which needed to be examine, but now, after the incredible
time of four days, it just proves by my silence there is not a shred
of corroborating evidence?

JT, no one expects you to go out and do any field research. It's a
reasonable assumption that you've never actually done any. Your field
research is limited to looking at DF's and JM's online references.

Does something happen to your brain when you use an alias? Is there a
trend here, Art Deco, Timberwoof and George, all aliases and all
morons.

The rest of your brainless drivel is not worth my time.

Let's see now. A kook calls me a moron. That doesn't hurt my feelings.
It just proves to me that he's a kook.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
.

Relevant Pages