Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- From: Dono <sa_ge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
On Jul 16, 2:17 pm, "Peter M. Brown-nose" <some...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
As you know I've recently seen an example of that, i.e. his changing of what
is recorded in google. Have you reported this to google yet? He could get
into very serious trouble for this. He'd deserve everything he got too. In
fact I think I'll E-mail Google now on this point. :) So whatever Dono says
must be assumed to be a lie unless one already knows differently.
Still spending time with your nose up Juanshito's ass, Petey?
.
- References:
- massless or massive photon?
- From: Juan R.
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Juan R.
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Juan R.
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Pmb
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Juan R.
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Cosmik de Bris
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Juan R.
- Re: massless or massive photon?
- From: Peter M. Brown
- Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- From: Pmb
- massless or massive photon?
- Prev by Date: Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- Next by Date: Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- Previous by thread: Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- Next by thread: Re: new USENET guidelines (was: massless or massive photon?)
- Index(es):