1. Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    Below is the reply sent early this morning by Mr. William S. Schenck of the Delaware Geological Survey in answer to my inquiry regarding the under-measurement
    Feb 16, 2005 @ 15:34 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  2. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    nice going & please look for several specific comments inserted ... great & now everyone can see what a must read this article is for any of these arc
    Feb 16, 2005 @ 18:01 - aletheia kallos (aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...>)
  3. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    Not to argue, but I would more nearly believe the theory of a bizarre projection of the compound curve than I do the theory of reverse discrimination to
    Feb 16, 2005 @ 18:45 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  4. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    ... bizarre projection ... really hahaha even after reading in the 1935 supreme court decision that the common arc of a common circle centered on the common
    Feb 16, 2005 @ 19:10 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  5. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    Please see insertions at two places below. Lowell G. McManus Leesville, Louisiana, USA ... From: aletheiak To:
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 05:45 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  6. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    inserts galore ... ok but what is all this about & with emphasis added yet for i dont yet follow your er argument or distinction or point or whatever it is you
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 16:05 - aletheia kallos (aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...>)
  7. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    We ve been brainstorming some very far-fetched theories in an attempt to explain the irrational mess that the Supremes created by their gross
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 17:33 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  8. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    what do you mean by wrangling ... an attempt to ... gross ... see it in print. I m ... you posted. ... wrangling until we have
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 17:44 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  9. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    ... their ... keep ... or maybe you just mean you yourself would probably thank me to stop reminding you when the evidence we do already have makes your
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 19:00 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  10. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    What you re doing now! :-) ... From: aletheiak To: Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 11:44 AM Subject:
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 22:39 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  11. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    hahahahaha you either need a new dictionary or a new smile
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 22:59 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  12. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    See one insertion. Lowell G. McManus Leesville, Louisiana, USA ... From: aletheiak To: Sent: Thursday,
    Feb 17, 2005 @ 23:08 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  13. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    ... McManus ... theories in ... we ... me to ... Artificial ... excuse me but i think your problem here since i know i have no problem myself is that all your
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 14:10 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  14. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    Mike D., ... So, do you suppose that the northern boundary of Tennesee is a single, unbroken line along 36° 30 ? No, that s a delimitation. The boundary as
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 16:20 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  15. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    ... hahahahaha hahahahahaha ahhh you have such a delicate way of putting things maestro & i am glad it came out this way but you are in the present case not
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 18:43 - aletheia kallos (aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...>)
  16. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    Okay, fine. I never said that I d done the math. I don t think anybody in present company has but you. I was only brainstorming suggestions in an attempt to
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 19:05 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  17. Re: Sandy Schenck Speaks!
    most importantly thanx for the exquisite shading of the cherry blossoms in the companion piece for i certainly do love your companionship in all this lunacy
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 20:27 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  18. Thanks
    I will be leaving this group soon as the volume of email is too much for me to handle. I wanted to say goodbye and thank you for your help with the Principal
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 20:39 - Shankland(Train) ("Shankland\(Train\)" <shankland@...>)
  19. Re: Thanks
    hey thank you too tom & farewell if you must go all your contributions have been well appreciated nor was the tongue lashing you got from our self styled agent
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 20:52 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  20. Re: Thanks
    oops & yikes i do mean you john ... the
    Feb 18, 2005 @ 21:00 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  21. further reflections on the sandy schenck data
    excerpts from the original message with miscellaneous notes added ... the ... crossing of the Delaware ... found at this direct ... Pennsylvania 12-Mile ... i
    Feb 21, 2005 @ 00:22 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
  22. new support for old denj guesses
    excerpts from last week with new findings added lowell ... well it seems you may not have been completely off the wall here even if you were off the map in
    Feb 21, 2005 @ 16:37 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)