On Fri, 02 May 2008 05:55:25 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 01 May 2008 19:24:11 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 May 2008 06:44:37 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
Were such scientific proof "discovered", I would be as interested in it
as
anyone else.


[Hammond]
The discovery is now a "political" issue. What your
"interest" is, depends on your political situation.



[John Smith, antiSPOG heckler]
Once again, empty claims, based on psychotic delusions, mean nothing.
Your crap is rejected because it has no relationshiop to either physics,
science or reality - NOT because of politics!

[Hammond]
Unsupported assertion.


[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
OK .. I forgot to add ..... your claim of "politics" is nothing more than an
unsupported assertion.


[Hammond]
Knowing Christianity is based on Jewish history and after
witnessing the Holocaust and the 3rd Reich you're going to
tell me the discovery of a scientific proof of God is not
"political", get real.

..



[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
Science would no nothing more, were a REAL "proof of god" discovered, than
add "god" to their base of facts and acceptable theories.


[Hammond]
Na, scientists are aggravated atheists, therefore they
will use every trick in the book, such as egging on
mentally disturbed Usenet hecklers like you, to suppress the
discovery and continue their unrestrained immoral
explaoitation of science and technology.

Not only an unsupported assertion, but a blatant lie.
A higher percentage of scientists are religious believers rather than
atheists.





[Hammond]
We can be sure the Christians and Jews will be glad about
it. Whether the Moslems will be happy about it is
problematical since an American Christian has discovered the
proof, not a Moslem. Atheistic Communists of course will be
sorely stung by the development, however, as Gorbachev said,
"Russia is a Christian country" and I certainly agree.
Chinese Communism however is going to have to accept the
idea that "God" is now a scientific reality to be tought in
their public schools as a scientific subject.....
suprisingly, the Chinese Communists may have less trouble
with this than the American public school system where
"seperation of Church and state" will indubitably attempt to
trumph Science education.

Whew ..... as someone else said ... be careful, George,


[Hammond]
I don't have to be careful, unlike you, I'm not a
notorious heckler.

[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
You're nothing more than a psycho troll!


[Hammond]
You're just a irate name caller.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Fri, 02 May 2008 06:12:51 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 1 May 2008 22:45:40 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Thu, 1 May 2008 18:44:40 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

Since anyone who is certified as having two graduate
degrees in Physics obviously knows what the scientific
method is, your post is nothing but atheistic heckling. Get
off this thread. My CV is a matter of public record and has
been posted many times on this thread and is conspicously
posted on my website.

So why are you completely unable to use it or even explain it?

[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION

Obviously my certified credentials prove that I can.

So why don't you? Or better yet, why didn't you? Any real


[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION


scientist would have done so from the beginning automatically, and
if you did, and if what you claim is true, your work would be in peer
reviewed journals and you'd be famous. But no, you're just bellowing
on usenet where everyone can laugh at your foolishness.



[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION


remember, my certified public record credentials PROVE that
i know what the scientific method is

Maybe "knew", not know. You probably haven't used the scientific method
or even thought of it for the last 40 years. You certainly didn't use
it for your SPOG crap.



[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION


I don't have to answer heckling atheistic jerks with no
credentials in science. There is no reason to!

If you ever want your work to appear in a peer reviewed journal, you'd
better start working on applying the scientific method to your work!
Just think, George. Some college kid could be sitting here, quietly
taking notes, reading your website, and then *he* could apply the
scientific method to *your* ideas, change it a little, and if it works
out, then *he* could get "his" work published in peer reviewed journals,
and *he* will get all the credit and become famous, because *he* did
all the hard work! But don't worry, George, that will never happen,
because as we all know, the SPOG is crap, and there's no college kid
out there that's that dumb.



[Hammond]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION


Why
not apply it to your so-called "research" into SPOG?

I have of course, as judged by it's publication in 2 peer
reviewed academic journals.

What experiments have you performed, that other scientists can also
perform, that would prove or disprove your work? The answer is NONE!
No experiments, no scientific method, no peer review, no "proof".


[Hammond]
All the necessary experiments have alreaqdy been performed,
confirmed and published in 10,000 experiments over 40 years
and ALL cited in my published papers.


No scientist would ever hope to get their work published in
a peer-reviewed publication without showing use of the scientific
method.

and since I HAVE published it in TWO peer reviewed
publications, that proves you are WRONG.

No you haven't.

[Hammond]
Yes I have:
Peer reviewed publications:

Hammond G.E (1994) The Cartesian Theory, in
New Ideas In Psychology, Vol 12(2) 153-167
Pergamon Press. Online copy of peer/published
paper is posted at:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/cart.html

Hammond G.E.(2003) A Semiclassical Proof of God
Noetic Journal, Vol 4(3) July 2003, pp 231-244(Noetic
Press)
Online copy of peer/published paper is posted at:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proo...ammond5s1.html


I hope those vanity journals didn't rip you off, err, I mean charge you
too much for their pretend "peer review".


[Hammond]
Peer reviewed academic journals are not vanity press and
do not "charge anything" for peer review or publication.

[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
And those two supermarket tabloids have nothing to do with REAL peer
reviewed journals.


[Hammond]
LIAR, Pergamon Press is one of the world's premier
academic publishers, and the paper published by them was
reviewed by 5 professors of Psychometry and Statistics.
The paper published by _Noetic Journal_ has 10 physicists
on the editorial board and the editor is a PhD physicist and
the paper was throughly reviewed before being published.
QUIT POSTING THIS LIE OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
QUIT YOUR LYING
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Fri, 02 May 2008 06:11:18 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

snip, no on topic content
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Fri, 02 May 2008 06:00:44 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 01 May 2008 19:18:38 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:29:12 -0700 (PDT), Roger Pearse

[Hammond]
In all fairness, what you have stated is prevailing
wisdom as of 2008 ad.
However, unbeknownst to either you or the Religious
community, in fact Physics has discovered (and published)
the world's first scientific proof of God (Hammond 2003).


[John Smith, antiSPOG heckler]
"Physics" has discovered nothing!
One, lonely old, psychotic, moron has bellowed crap - whch he pretends is
actually science.


[Hammond]
Sorry heckler, I've already published the discovery of the
Structural Model and the Scientific proof of God in two peer
reviewed copyright academic journals and they are sitting on
the library shelves in Universites around the world. This
secures my priorities in the discovery for the duration.
That is to say nothing of 50,000 posts to usent about it,
all archived by Google and half a dozen other data bases and
witnessed by 50,000 Usenet responders plus another 500,000
people who have hit my website in the past 9 years.
Sorry, you're not going to do anything to interfere with
my priorities. Screw.


[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
Show evidence that the articles have drawn the attention you claim.
Merely bellowing (as you usually do, then treating your own bellowing as a
fact - doesn't work!

Hundreds of time that (number of hits) occur on porno sites every month.
Show ANY evidence that ANY ONE of these hits result is someone supporting
your S.P.O.Crap!


Same psycho claims that have been blown to pieces every time you try to use
them as reality.
You're priorities have only one basis - your deranged egomania.



[Hammond]
Get real..... how many threads do you see on the Physics
news groups that reach 400 posts like this one?
And you don't believe my website has gotton 500,000 hits
in 9 years.... why for chrissakes when someone posted a note
about my website on FARK, 5,000 people hit the website in
ONE HOUR! Wake up.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 May 2008 23:41:44 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Thu, 1 May 2008 13:33:21 -0700 (PDT), Roger Pearse
wrote:


[Hammond]
Actually I was being charitable, having forgot that on
Usenet to give them an inch is to give them a mile.
To be quite accurate, the history of the emergence of the
4-Gospel Canon is quite well known and not considered a
mystery as you suggest, so that your statement:

"....we don't actually *know* for certain how
the 4 gospels came to be generally accepted
during the late first/early second century..."

is actually an erroneous gloss. Fact is, it is well known
how the 4-Gospels came into being in 1-2 ad since Irenaeus
has left a 2nd century account of the matter in his famous
book _Against Heresies_, (c 180).

Um, perhaps you would care to post whatever passage you think says
this? As far as I know, it remains unknown.

All the best,

Roger Pearse



[Hammond]
There is little mystery to the history of the 4-Gospel
Canon, even to people who merely consider themselves
strictly "historians". Of course more eclectic individuals
are aware that it is an encapsulation of Personality
Structure in Man; the Political Left-right and the Upper vs.
Lower class (e.g. the Bicameral/2Party system.
But even the most unaware historians are familiar with
the history of the NT, for instance it is well known there
were a dozen writings in large circulation by the mid 1st
century.... and that the "Muratorian Fragment" lists the 4
Gospels at the top of the list as early as 170.
Irenaeus was considered an authority by the Church on the
question of "how many Gospels should there be in the Bible"
wrote the above cited (famous and widely known) passage
in 180 ad.
Origen of Alexandria wrote many texts and commentaries on
the 4-gospel Canon in the early 3rd century.
And finally, Tatian's famous DIATESSARON (c 150 - 160) is
a historically famous Gospel harmony. In it, Tatian,
combined Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into a single
narrative. The historic prominence of this work from 155ad.
alone, is testimony that the 4-Gospel Canon was well known
and widely accepted by mid second century ad.

The following facts are well known:

The earliest external reference to the Gospel of Mark is
Papias, dated to AD 130.

Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, makes indirect references
to the Gospel of Matthew as early as AD 110.

Polycarp, a famous early church leader quotes Luke-Acts in a
letter dated to about A.D. 110.

A papyrus fragment of the Gospel of John has been dated to
between A.D. 110 and 160.

The Muratorian Canon (c. A.D. 180-200) lists all four of the
Gospels as authoritative for the early church.


So, while Irenaeus' authoritative statement which was
very well known by 200 essentially fixed the Canon as "4",
it was of course the later "canonization" of the 4-gospel
canon by Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria in 367 that
"officially" sealed the creation period of the 4-gospel
Canon.


But, like I say,..... aware intellectuals have known the
4-gospel Canon was a "quadrate personality structure" ever
since Hippocrates the Father of Medicine announced that Man
had "4-Personalities" in 500 bc. (the 4-Humors)
Today of course, Hammond has not only proven the
4-Humors of Hippocrates and the 4-Gospels of Christianity,
but actually shown that they originate in the quadrature
cleavage of the brain, which in turns originates in the
quadrature (Euclidean) cleavage structure of space itself,
hence the 4-Gospel Canon has now been determined to be an
"AXIOMATIXC LAW OF PHYSICS" (Hammond, 1994, 2003)


Incidentally, it is a pleasure to be in polite company
for a change.... but surely you must realize that this
discussion thread is taking place in a war zone.

When you post about the history of the bible - it is one thing.
When you post utter bull **** - like your last paragraph/pile - you get
another, more appropriate, response.

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 02 May 2008 05:55:25 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 01 May 2008 19:24:11 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 01 May 2008 06:44:37 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
Were such scientific proof "discovered", I would be as interested in
it
as
anyone else.


[Hammond]
The discovery is now a "political" issue. What your
"interest" is, depends on your political situation.



[John Smith, antiSPOG heckler]
Once again, empty claims, based on psychotic delusions, mean nothing.
Your crap is rejected because it has no relationshiop to either physics,
science or reality - NOT because of politics!

[Hammond]
Unsupported assertion.


[John Smith, antiSPOG critic]
OK .. I forgot to add ..... your claim of "politics" is nothing more than
an
unsupported assertion.


[Hammond]
Knowing Christianity is based on Jewish history and after
witnessing the Holocaust and the 3rd Reich you're going to
tell me the discovery of a scientific proof of God is not
"political", get real.

What?

What the hell kind of babbling bull **** are you trying to sell now?

Obviously THIS is your best example of not knowing ANYTHING about logic,
reality, science or the scientific method.
You're deranged beyond comprehension.


BTW ..... **** for brains, I am a critic against "S.P.O.G." ...... or an
"anti-S.P.O.G., critic".
I am NOT a critic against anti-S.P.O.G.

Were you educated, you would know the difference.

On 2 May, 00:41, George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2008 13:33:21 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse

wrote:
On 1 May, 18:09, George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2008 06:42:17 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse

wrote:
On 1 May, 08:51, George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 23:29:12 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse
wrote:
On 30 Apr, 22:49, George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:42:57 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse

wrote:

On 29 Apr, 08:19, none ""doug\"@(none)" wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
("4-demigods") Matt, Mark, Luke and John.

[Roger Pearse]
These last four are the books chosen by the council ofNicea
to be in the New Testament. *

The Council of Nicaea did not determine the content of scripture.. *The
4 gospels are considered canonical by all the ante-Nicene fathers,
right back as far as it goes.

[Hammond]
* *The 4-Gospel canon "emerged" from hitory thru wide
circulation as a "popular convention"; true Ireanus, Bishop
of Lyon put the final stamp of approval on it when he edited
the NT:

* "But it is not possible that the Gospels can be either
* *more or fewer in number than they are. For since there
* *are four zones of the world in which we live, and four
* *principal winds, while the church has been scattered
* *throughout the world, and since the "pillar and ground"
* *of the church is the Gospel and the spirit of life, it is
* *fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing
* *incorruption on every side, and vivifying human afresh.
* * * * * * * * (Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon ca. 180ad)

In fairness, we don't actually *know* for certain how the 4 gospels
came to be generally accepted during the late first/early second
century; we just find that they are, as soon as the subject comes up.
Irenaeus takes it for granted, and we should remember he was taught by
the apostle John's disciple Polycarp, so knew a whole lot more about
the apostles than we do.

[Hammond]
* *In all fairness, what you have stated is prevailing
wisdom as of 2008 ad.

[Roger Pearse]
I believe so.

[Hammond]
* *Actually I was being charitable, having forgot that on
Usenet to give them an inch is to give them a mile.
* *To be quite accurate, the history of the emergence of the
4-Gospel Canon is quite well known and not considered a
mystery as you suggest, so that your statement:

* * * * *"....we don't actually *know* for certain how
* * * * * the 4 gospels came to be generally accepted
* * * * * during the late first/early second century..."

is actually an erroneous gloss. * Fact is, it is well known
how the 4-Gospels came into being in 1-2 ad since Irenaeus
has left a 2nd century account of the matter in his famous
book *_Against Heresies_, (c 180).

Um, perhaps you would care to post whatever passage you think says
this? *As far as I know, it remains unknown.

[Hammond]
* *There is little mystery to the history of the 4-Gospel
Canon, even to people who merely consider themselves
strictly "historians". *...
* *But even the most unaware historians are familiar with
the history of the NT, for instance it is well known there
were a dozen writings in large circulation by the mid 1st
century....

Probably true; but how do we know this?

...and that the "Muratorian Fragment" *lists the 4
Gospels at the top of the list as early as 170.

True.

* *Irenaeus was considered an authority by the Church on the
question of "how many Gospels should there be in the Bible"

Evidence?

... wrote the above cited (famous and widely known) passage
in 180 ad.

Indeed. But what it doesn't say is how this came about.

* *Origen of Alexandria wrote many texts and commentaries on
the 4-gospel Canon in the early 3rd century.

Certainly, but this is neither here nor there.

* *And finally, Tatian's famous DIATESSARON (c 150 - 160) is
a historically famous Gospel harmony. *In it, Tatian,
combined Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into a single
narrative. *The historic prominence of this work from 155ad.
alone, is testimony that the 4-Gospel Canon was well known
and widely accepted by mid second century ad.

Perhaps.

* *The following facts are well known:

The earliest external reference to the Gospel of Mark is
Papias, dated to AD 130.

Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, makes indirect references
to the Gospel of Matthew as early as AD 110.

Polycarp, a famous early church leader quotes Luke-Acts in a
letter dated to about A.D. 110.

A papyrus fragment of the Gospel of John has been dated to
between A.D. 110 and 160.

The Muratorian Canon (c. A.D. 180-200) lists all four of the
Gospels as authoritative for the early church.

* *So, while Irenaeus' authoritative statement which was
very well known by 200 essentially fixed the Canon as "4",

Well, all the statements above are true. But... there is still a wide
area largely unknown, inside all of this.

* * Incidentally, it is a pleasure to be in polite company
for a change.... but surely you must realize that this
discussion thread is taking place in a war zone.

Likewise. Actually... I really was unaware of that fact. I'd just
dropped in to the post that I found in google. Pardon me if I head
for cover!

All the best,

Roger Pearse

On 1 May, 23:22, George Hammond wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2008 13:35:05 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse

wrote:
On 1 May, 20:18, "John Smith" wrote:
"Physics" has discovered nothing!
One, lonely old, psychotic, moron has bellowed crap - whch he pretends is
actually science.

Come; if he were really lonely, old and psychotic, surely the least we
could do is give him good language? *If only out of kindness?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

[Hammond]
* *Look, Roger.... being polite to hecklers is for amateurs,
I'm not an amateur.
* *Hecklers are in general incorrigible psychotic
personalities, a personality trait that typically lasts for
decades if not a lifetime. *So, don't feed hecklers unless
you are intent on merely practicing your typing or
something. *They have NO intention of saying anything on
topic or constructive, their SOLE intent is to destroy the
reputation of their (political) opponant.

Perhaps so. I tend to presume people are not heckling until it proves
otherwise. (Then I slap them around, of course)

* *And by the way, the same goes for atheists, so if you
happen to be an atheist, please tell me up front before I
waste time talking to you. *
Politely, George Hammond

No, I'm not an atheist, and I know too well the sort of atheist poster
that you refer to. You can't drop a pebble in alt.atheism without
meeting one. No, I was merely interested in the details of fact about
Christian origins.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

On Fri, 2 May 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), Roger Pearse
wrote:




[Hammond]
* *And finally, Tatian's famous DIATESSARON (c 150 - 160) is
a historically famous Gospel harmony. *In it, Tatian,
combined Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into a single
narrative. *The historic prominence of this work from 155ad.
alone, is testimony that the 4-Gospel Canon was well known
and widely accepted by mid second century ad.


[Roger Pearse]
Perhaps.



[Hammond]
No perhaps about it! The DIATESSARON was the standard
Gospel text of the Syria Christian Church for 200 years.
It's dating to 155ad is indisputable. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatessaron
where you will find:
=========BLOCK QUOTE==============
The Diatesseron is notable evidence for the authority
already enjoyed by the four gospels by the mid-second
century.
Twenty years after Tatian's harmony, Irenaeus expressly
proclaimed the authoritative character of the four gospels.
The Diatesseron became the standard text of the gospels
in the Syriac-speaking churches down to the fifth century,
when it gave way to the four separate Gospels."
======END BLOCK QUOTE==============
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 02 May 2008 00:55:34 -0400, monkfish
monkfish@nowhere wrote:


[Hammond]
Sorry heckler, I've already published the discovery of the
Structural Model and the Scientific proof of God in two peer
reviewed copyright academic journals and they are sitting on
the library shelves in Universites around the world. This
secures my priorities in the discovery for the duration.
That is to say nothing of 50,000 posts to usent about it,
all archived by Google and half a dozen other data bases and
witnessed by 50,000 Usenet responders plus another 500,000
people who have hit my website in the past 9 years.
Sorry, you're not going to do anything to interfere with
my priorities. Screw.

[John Smith, compulsive antiSPOG heckler]
You notice that no one cares about your "proof" and the only
interest it gets is for people to laugh at. No one takes
it seriously. Those who read it cannot take it seriously.
It is the worst piece of an attempt to ignore science and
get to a desired conclusion that any of us has seen. Your
derivation makes congress look quiet and logical.
[monkfish, pius humanitarian]
Why are you talking to him?


[Hammond]
They can't STOP talking to me! They can sense that I am
the only in the world who actually knows the scientific
truth about God.
The same thing happened to Jesus dontcha know?
Last time it was a crufixion. This time it's the world's
first and only scientific proof of God. Thank Christ I'm
not Jewish or they'd probably be after me with two 2x4's and
3 nails!
No, they do not care because they are smart enough to recognize
nonsense.

You don't seem to appreciate the worse than death mental
suffering some people go thru.... especially intelligent
people.... some of them scientists. Eventually THEY
RECOGNIZE that it is imperitive for their survival to find
out the factual scientific truth about "God". And they also
know that the unlucky s.o.b. who accidentally discovers it
(Hammond) is not going to be able to make ANYBODY "an offer
they can't refuse".
That's why he's talking to me. That's why their all
talking to me.


We talk to him out of pity. He is making a fool of himself saying
totally nonsensical things. He is embarrassing himself and we all
hope he will get better and learn some physics so he can see how
silly what he has posted is. He refuses to even look at what he
says and blusters only. Inside, he knows it is wrong but he
just desperately wants to have done something important. It would
be better if he learned to accept himself as ok even though
he had never discovered anything.


--
monkfish * alt.atheism is removed from the header because atheists there
consider quoting the Bible proselytizing and as such it is prohibited by
their undebatable policy.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================