Read and right.Btw, I wasn't suggesting that he be able to write here.. I was suggesting that he would be un-IP-banned, you know, readonly
Wait, what, page61?
When you catch a thief in you house making off with you cash, you don't ask him why he is doing it and if he is doing it.I'm not sure Val you'd have to ask him
No, he is Mowl's sock. I have put forward a lit of evidence on Page 61 but he is not the only one.Wait, what, page61?
Isn't he just a semi-literate atheist with a short fuse?
The flaw here Val is that most people refer to Gemtrails as that " mad cow" O' Doherty. How could one do otherwise in fairness.Here is a post from page 61 of PI.
I hope the people involved know that the general public do not see 3 groups. They see one .
The only good thing I have read is someone wants to distance their group from mad cow O'Doherty ..
Note he read it, he was not at the protest. Not a lot but he lives in Finland. Note the word "COW" He is obsessed with cows and their excrement. Note he calls Gemma mad and Mowl have described here as a nut job requiring treatment under the mental health acts. Everything here aligns with the valamhic test.
I was one of the first to point out those flaws and was banned at least once for doing so. Since then most have recognized what I said to be true.The flaw here Val is that most people refer to Gemtrails as that " mad cow" O' Doherty. How could one do otherwise in fairness.
Those are some very precise mathematical calculations ValI was one of the first to point out those flaws and was banned at least once for doing so. Since then most have recognized what I said to be true.
The valamhic test ( soon to be upgraded to the valamhic dynamic test) does not take account of the politics, mentality of traits of the subject being discussed. So Gemma is simple the rabbit by which the hound dog is assessed. In this example she is the ball in the game of football. The commentator may say the ball is wet or dry but that is all.
The test examines the principle poster's posts and as many of them as possible over a long period of time profiling style, syntax, sympathies,
idiosyncrasies. even such things at a dislike of prawns, coke, sexuality, people, do they drive? do they fish? films liked, music liked./disliked.
illnesses suffered, medical experience, piles. Attitude to Ireland, place where living.
Not only are these assessed, but their absence is assessed. Do they ever let slip where they live and if not why?
The result is a set of positive attributes and the absence of any information on attributes. Each one is assigned a weigh between 0 and 100 %.
Mowl is from Dublin and lives in Helsinki Finland = 100%
Godsdog never says where he/she is, = -3%
" Hates Trump = - 10%
" Hates valamhic (not rare) = - 5%
" Hates Dan = - 3%
" Likes cats and dogs but not cows = - 8%
" Supports Finn Fein = - 13.5% ( half of the parties support because it is not representative of the population.
Says Gemma is a nut job = - 7%
Short sharp style of posting with a hurried tilt = - 15%
Occasional very long posts = -9%
Obsession with anything (slurry etc) = -20%
Now we are at 93 and 1/2 and a half. This is only an example and not real.
For example Ollie poster to a ridiculous amount about slurry, yet could not discuss it at all. He was anti Justin Barrett and Trump. Eventually the test proved 100% that he was Mowl and Lowl could not post him again because he was just on about a narrow range of posts so he had to drop him. He is gone. The other thing is that as I post I am near to proof, the sock has to be pulled down and that is more evidence.
It is equal to fingerprinting. Foolproof except a bigger sample is needed.
The method up to now just test two (one being the principal and the other being the suspected sock). Log tables are used. My new methodThose are some very precise mathematical calculations Val
Two patients are in one bed room in a hospital, what is the probability that they will have the same birthday?Valamhic may have workedon The Manhattan Project and is too modest to boost because he is a whiz with figures. Valstein.
1/365 = 0.27%.. is a slightly shorter way to arrive at that figureTwo patients are in one bed room in a hospital, what is the probability that they will have the same birthday?
The probability on Tom having a birthday is 100%, say its the 15th September. The probability of Ned not having a birthday on the same date
is 364/365 X 100 = 99.726% Therefore the probability of Ned having the same birthday as Tom is 100 - 99.726 = ,274%
I am not sure what I said. but light is just as susceptible to gravity as anything else. Nothing larger than an atom can avoid gravity and no sub atomic particle can escape gravity. That includes electro magnetic radiation of which light is a form. The proof is that light leaving a black hole is prevented from escaping from the black hole and we can never see it. There is no greater reduction in speed than to stop altogether and (although it is never observed) to be pulled back into its source.I may not agree a hundred percent with your detective work Val but I don't question your methodology.
Sadly, I recall you saying that light "bends" (in direction) and changes speed. Those were schoolboy errors