1. OKTX --finally! figures
    Including only larger river bends: Red River -- 480.0 miles East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles North Panhandle line -- 167 miles (minus 2.2 miles TXNM) Total
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 16:13 - Joe Isham (Joe Isham <gridlockjoe@...>)
  2. Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    yes finally you have produced 2 subjective fantasies & by a single subject yet indeed by the state of texas itself these numbers however include not only oktx
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 18:35 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  3. RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    A physical distance can be measured. It is not a fantasy. ... From: acroorca2002 [mailto:orc@orcoast.com] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 12:35 PM To:
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 19:06 - Flynn, Kevin ("Flynn, Kevin" <flynnk@...>)
  4. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    On Thursday 17 April 2003 03:06 pm, you wrote: Om, om, om... ... -- Brian J. Butler BJB Software, Inc. 508-429-1441 bjbutler@bjbsoftware.com
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 19:56 - Brian J. Butler (Brian J. Butler <bjbutler@...>)
  5. RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    Ow, ow, ow... ... From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@bjbsoftware.com] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 3:57 PM To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re:
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 20:31 - Bill Hanrahan ("Bill Hanrahan" <hanrahan@...>)
  6. RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    Huh, huh, huh? ... From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@bjbsoftware.com] Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:57 PM To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com Subject:
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 20:57 - Flynn, Kevin ("Flynn, Kevin" <flynnk@...>)
  7. Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    On Thursday 17 April 2003 12:13 pm, you wrote: And following really small meanders Red River - -1234 miles East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles North Panhandle
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 19:54 - Brian J. Butler (Brian J. Butler <bjbutler@...>)
  8. RE: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    It would really not go on like that. If the boundary is defined, one follows that definition. If OK-TX has been defined as a certain location in the channel of
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 21:04 - Flynn, Kevin ("Flynn, Kevin" <flynnk@...>)
  9. Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    On Thursday 17 April 2003 05:04 pm, you wrote: Let me trry one more time, and then if you still don t get it, I will give up. Suppose a boundary is defined as
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 22:18 - Brian J. Butler (Brian J. Butler <bjbutler@...>)
  10. RE: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    I really have not misunderstood any of the points made in opposition to measuring a physical boundary... I have only said that it can be done, and it is done.
    Apr 17, 2003 @ 23:58 - Flynn, Kevin ("Flynn, Kevin" <flynnk@...>)
  11. Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    On Thursday 17 April 2003 07:58 pm, you wrote: OK, I give up. And I give you an F in fractal geometry. BJB ... -- Brian J. Butler BJB Software, Inc.
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 00:02 - Brian J. Butler (Brian J. Butler <bjbutler@...>)
  12. Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    for kevin joe or anyone else interested in seeking the most punctilious possible truth here first a fast easy crash course in fractal maths
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 01:22 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  13. RE: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    That s fine by me, because it has nothing to do with it. I give you an F in measuring a boundary.
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 03:59 - Flynn, Kevin ("Flynn, Kevin" <flynnk@...>)
  14. Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
    If a fractal is symmetrical over the x-axis, and you take the top half as one half the bank of a lake, and the bottom half as the other, the line dividing them
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 04:58 - Michael Kaufman (Michael Kaufman <mikekaufman79@...>)
  15. Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    thanx michael man after my heart ... this is the only part i dont get yet ahhh yes i do now you are always stretching my brains nice going yet punctologically
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 13:33 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  16. Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    ... an F in ... very poignantly done you guys tho class e as in elusive is normally as low as we grade here or well class ee or eee i suppose in extremest
    Apr 18, 2003 @ 18:19 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  17. RE: [BoundaryPoint] Re: OKTX --finally! figures
    Michael, Does this discussion have any bearing on the status of AR-OK-TX tri-point? As I recall we thought it was wet, but at the OK-TX corner it should be on
    Apr 19, 2003 @ 01:48 - jparsell ("jparsell" <jparsell@...>)