Tweet
The other day, I spent a few hours in the reading room at the Landover Christian University Library researching the influence of witchcraft on modern secular science. (Oh, there’s plenty of evidence out there, for the Devil never sleeps.)
I had noted the names of 20 or 30 secular scientists, who will eventually have a lot of answering to do, on DoF form, “W1Sci(a)” and was preparing to send it off in the post when my eyes were caught by the following passage at page 8:
I came close to vomiting! Look at those phrases in red! Deny if you can that this is Homer Code for the worst abominations!
(i)“the H–H bond length” Could this be a reference to the tallywhacker length of 2 homers who are abominating? I read on…
(ii)“The back-donation can occur as the end result of two successive interactions.” Back donation!!! Is that what they call it now??? Oh, such vileness! Godly donations are only via the PayPal button below!!!!
(iii)“the highest occupied MO (HOMO)” How much more graphic need this be?! Fags are bad enough wandering about loose in society, but do we really need to examine those who are “at it”?
(iv)“The extent of charge transfer binding is expected to be strongest for systems with HOMO of appropriate symmetry” Is this “charge transfer binding” something to do with the “issue” mentioned in Eze:23:20: For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses? It certainly translates that way to me.
(v)“its HOMO is of p symmetry,” We all know what “p” stands for… We were not born yesterday… we keep up with this modern slang… Is any Christian really bothered about the symmetry of a homer? Perhaps it is a fashion statement amongst those of lovers of the chocolate starfish!!
(vi)“cannot couple to the s* level of H2 in that geometry, but can in the off-center geometry that is favored” Do we really want to be told what H2 (the second Homer) favors??? I for one do NOT!
The lessons we take from this are:
(i)don’t go reading secular science, that’s for homers and that’s how gullible young men are attracted to the homer deathstyle.
(ii)Witchcraft is not the only abomination of secular scientists
(iii)The Devil is not satisfied with his science minions using witchcraft but uses them to promote homerism!
I had noted the names of 20 or 30 secular scientists, who will eventually have a lot of answering to do, on DoF form, “W1Sci(a)” and was preparing to send it off in the post when my eyes were caught by the following passage at page 8:
The noticeable perturbation of the H–H bond length in these systems indicates decreased occupation of the 's' orbital and/or increased occupation of the s* orbital, in the simplest molecular orbital (MO) picture. The back-donation can occur as the end result of two successive interactions. First, mixing of the unperturbed s and s* orbitals of H2 under the influence of the neighboring charge, followed by coupling between the highest occupied MO (HOMO) of the anion with the perturbed s* orbital to effect partial charge transfer. The extent of charge transfer binding is expected to be strongest for systems with HOMO of appropriate symmetry and highest energy (i.e. lowest ionization potential). For example, NO+ does not bind in a linear geometry because its HOMO is of p symmetry, which cannot couple to the s* level of H2 in that geometry, but can in the off-center geometry that is favored.
I came close to vomiting! Look at those phrases in red! Deny if you can that this is Homer Code for the worst abominations!
(i)“the H–H bond length” Could this be a reference to the tallywhacker length of 2 homers who are abominating? I read on…
(ii)“The back-donation can occur as the end result of two successive interactions.” Back donation!!! Is that what they call it now??? Oh, such vileness! Godly donations are only via the PayPal button below!!!!
(iii)“the highest occupied MO (HOMO)” How much more graphic need this be?! Fags are bad enough wandering about loose in society, but do we really need to examine those who are “at it”?
(iv)“The extent of charge transfer binding is expected to be strongest for systems with HOMO of appropriate symmetry” Is this “charge transfer binding” something to do with the “issue” mentioned in Eze:23:20: For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses? It certainly translates that way to me.
(v)“its HOMO is of p symmetry,” We all know what “p” stands for… We were not born yesterday… we keep up with this modern slang… Is any Christian really bothered about the symmetry of a homer? Perhaps it is a fashion statement amongst those of lovers of the chocolate starfish!!
(vi)“cannot couple to the s* level of H2 in that geometry, but can in the off-center geometry that is favored” Do we really want to be told what H2 (the second Homer) favors??? I for one do NOT!
The lessons we take from this are:
(i)don’t go reading secular science, that’s for homers and that’s how gullible young men are attracted to the homer deathstyle.
(ii)Witchcraft is not the only abomination of secular scientists
(iii)The Devil is not satisfied with his science minions using witchcraft but uses them to promote homerism!
Comment