John H. Casada wrote:
>> K C Cheng wrote:
> >
> > It's totally inadequate to have abstracts when the proof is vital.
> > Every sentence must be read, every diagram studied, to see what is
> > right, what is wrong.
>> If you had some experience in science you would recognize that the
> purpose of the abstracts is to see if "every sentence" and "every
> diagram" is worth reading. Give it a try.
>> > As I said before, it's up to others to seek, not for me to give,
> > knowledgee.
> > Since you don't feel it wothwhile to get a copy, I doubt it's wortth
> > my 100 dollars to send you one. When Einstein published his Theory of
> > Relativity,
> > surely it was not for him to explain first. It was for others to buy
> > it.
>> Again, if you had *any* experience with science you would know that
> Einstein's theories were published in reviewed journals first. He
> didn't copyrite a book and say "for $100 I'll show you something really
> neat!"
>> Try (just try) to show a little scientific courtesy and give information
> instead of empty commercials.
>> > Everyone's thinking is "private." Why should anyone's be "public?"
>> Because you are making public claims????
>> > > In everyday language, "put up or shut up¡I
> > That goes for you too! That kind of arrogance is like the Nazis to
> > the Jewish scientists in WW II. Ha! What's so important about you?
> > Being an American?
> > > However, I have
> > > >several volumes published for private and public viewing. Before I
> > > can
> > > >have money to publish them all for a world wide evaluation, I
> > > attempted
> > > >to have several issues put on the Web. But, now, I have to buy a
> > > new
> > > >site just to show them.
>> I've seen your site. Have you ever seen the Smurfs on t.v.?? Your site
> is really "Chengy!" Maybe "Papa Cheng" can publish the "Chenerific"
> exploits of "Cheniography." Be sure to get it reviewed. There must be
> armies of "Chengs" who will give you impartial feedback. One day, when
> you find enough suckers--"Che-cheng!!!" You may be rolling in the
> dough!
>> John
Re. the above:
I repeat my apologies just posted a minute ago. My inadequacies at
webpage making has caused this misunderstanding. I thought I had given
out my first 3.5, now 4 issues on the web. Now you can see them FOR
SURE. Any more problems with the site, please e-Mail me. NOW I know
how to correct these technical problems.
Thanks!
kccheng ¾G«a¸s
http://www.easyhosting.com/~kccheng
