Re: NOT A cruel fraud!

From: M. Warner Losh <imp_at_BSDIMP.COM>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 01:39:43 -0700 (MST)

In message: <>
            James Maynard <james.h.maynard_at_USA.NET> writes:
: If "we've been over this in great detail," I would like a more specific
: reference to the postings that did so. Also, "we've been over this in
: great detail" seems not to have settled the issue.

We have been over these points in great detail. Both here, and over
on the time-nuts mailing list. Many of the same posters post to both

: It's cruel to insult a newbie so, and cause him to spend hours and hours
: perusing the archives, to no avail.

You learned a great deal. You can learn more by reading the time nuts
archive as well.

: > TAI is specifically contraindicated as a time
: > scale.
: > TAI is not currently recommended by its creators as a viable time
: > scale.
: >
: These claims are intellectually fraudulent. The archives in fact support
: the opposite of what Mr. Losh contends.

Actually, it isn't quite that cut and dried.

Received on Sun Jan 22 2006 - 00:40:17 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT