Witness Marks Report--Revised and Expanded

wterrell · 09-06-2003, 04:08 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I am sure that all will be relieved to know that this will be my final comment on the "lines" issue. <hr /></blockquote>
Naw, Jim. You have not caused that much stir. No one is upset with your posts.

And I agree that all you have posted is your ideas and assumptions. Not evidence. And not very impressive ideas.

And there is a difference between "summary" and "final arguments".

If you think that the machinery of 1900 was not precise enough to time threads, you do not know of what you speak. And do not understand the workings of a lathe or mill. Do some research.

And you have not posted one single pic to support your 'theory'. Your whole argument is lame.

09-06-2003, 04:08 PM	#16
wterrell User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,096 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> I am sure that all will be relieved to know that this will be my final comment on the "lines" issue. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva"> Naw, Jim. You have not caused that much stir. No one is upset with your posts. And I agree that all you have posted is your ideas and assumptions. Not evidence. And not very impressive ideas. And there is a difference between "summary" and "final arguments". If you think that the machinery of 1900 was not precise enough to time threads, you do not know of what you speak. And do not understand the workings of a lathe or mill. Do some research. And you have not posted one single pic to support your 'theory'. Your whole argument is lame. __________________ Noli me vocare, ego te vocabo, wes --------------------