English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It is constituted in the interpretation of the Universe only based in the nuclear fissão beyond the conflicting interpretations to affirm that the stars are Sun, that misty next are galaxies if finding, ignoring the magnetism of the diagram of the energies of the Universe You the Tarcísio Brito. Example: Sun (+) > {(+) Land (-)} < (-) Interstellar System. Only accepting this fact, the knowledge can advance. You agree or disagree.

2007-03-04 02:04:28 · 12 answers · asked by britotarcisio 6 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

12 answers

You the Tarcísio Brito.....HUH?

2007-03-04 10:27:38 · answer #1 · answered by !@@#@#!@ 2 · 0 0

Haven't you learned by now that you are not saying anything anyone else can understand? English must be your second language and you aren't very good at it. Why don't you go to an online translator and put your questions in there in your native language and have them translate for you. You won't get anywhere this way.

2007-03-04 17:04:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What the hell are you talking about? Did you use some sort of an online translater or something? Because that made about as much sense as Special Ed on crack.

2007-03-04 11:15:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

one of the great errors of astronomical science was believing that the earth was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe.

2007-03-04 21:00:13 · answer #4 · answered by buckyball378 1 · 0 0

I AGREE! what you have written is one of 'the great errors of astronomical science!'

As it makes little, or no sense

2007-03-04 10:19:20 · answer #5 · answered by occluderx 4 · 0 0

Believe me, man! If your theory is as good as your english, let me give you a piece of advice: don't quit your day job. That is, if you have one...

2007-03-04 10:24:14 · answer #6 · answered by sagan1976 3 · 0 0

This is complete jibberish. Haven't you got something better to do?

2007-03-04 10:13:59 · answer #7 · answered by Michael 4 · 0 0

Lots of things are invisible, but we don't know how many, because we can't see them.

2007-03-04 11:20:51 · answer #8 · answered by David A 5 · 0 0

What a dweeb

2007-03-04 11:38:56 · answer #9 · answered by zypher 2 · 0 0

Wow, the crack is starting to kick in!!

2007-03-04 10:31:02 · answer #10 · answered by Craig C 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers