|
Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 |
Thanks to you and Roger for looking at this. I always found the ring maps interesting, but it is just as interesting to note you have analyzed them and found them not to be predictors. I really like having scientists on this board. Keeps us all grounded. On some of the other boards, it seems like any old theory is taken as a given, no matter how absurd. Thanks for being here. Roger, that goes for you, too. Cathryn Follow Ups: ● Thanks Cathryn. n/t - Roger Hunter 18:59:59 - 1/29/2006 (33257) (0) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 17:03:54 - 1/29/2006 (33254) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - Cathryn 18:05:09 - 1/29/2006 (33255) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 07:54:22 - 1/31/2006 (33271) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - Cathryn 14:18:11 - 1/31/2006 (33274) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 16:30:41 - 1/31/2006 (33301) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 19:27:48 - 1/31/2006 (33302) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 07:57:48 - 2/1/2006 (33307) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 15:05:29 - 2/1/2006 (33311) (0) |
|