 | | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) 2030: designer human v5.0 The baby can change its own nappy. :) Scott A (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Is it not our intelligence which separates from rest of the animals? Is that not the key to our evolution, or do you think it is incidental? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) (Not that Discover magazine really has anything to do with Discovery Communications Inc., but still...) So here's a little story. I'm in the position where, to compliment my National Geographic collection, I'm looking for a subscription to any (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Why Do so many hate America"... or is it "Why does America hate US?"?
|
|
Let me first go over the article itself, before I comment on the response Larry posted. (...) One explanation, yes. (...) Inside its borders, yes. (...) That gets to the point. (...) This argument leaves me behind ... (...) Very true. (...) Again (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I understood Larry's point differently, in that optimistically we might never go extinct (technology propelling us beyond the earth, the solar system, the galaxy, the universe...), but in terms of biological evolution we're more or less at a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) of (...) tend (...) We may, in the end, cause our own extinction, in which case I guess you could say we're currently in the process of stopping our evolution, but I think it's a pretty big stretch. As I've said before, I think humanity will (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Except to stop it. Which we are in the process of doing, and which was my original point! ++Lar (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) to (...) "wrong (...) That may be so, but I would think that most people who have a middling understanding of evolution would agree that intelligence has little (if any) effect on it. (...) right (...) No. Read the question again. I was (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) A couple of eminently debatable assertions. *Read Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" for a perspective on the furphy of IQ testing -- recent editions include a refutation of the premise and methodology that inform "The Bell Curve" c/ race /class. (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Though admittedly a generalization, this trend in intelligence:breeding rate is based on an evolutionarily insignificant stretch of time. Further, even in the hypothetical example, the judging of intelligence based on academic achievement (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta loveOracle...)
|
|
(...) Yes - easier to illegally get arms. I could get an illegal gun MUCH easier than a legal gun, yet I choose to wait and get one following the ridiculous laws of this state. How does the ease of illegal acquisition for criminals affect the fact (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I would think that most people with at least middling intelligence would tend to agree that decreasing the overall intelligence level of our species is the "wrong way". Do you have a reason to think that decreasing our species intelligence is (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: At last, a Federal program we can all support.
|
|
(...) It's like those shows on the Discovery Channel that quote "UFO experts" or "experts in the paranormal." How the heck does someone qualify as a UFO expert? Has he "seen" a bunch of UFOs? Has he heard a lot of stories about UFOs? Did he see (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
|
(...) In the UK this is already done indirectly. I think speed is altered based on how close the cars are travelling together on some roads leading to London - slow moving cars travel closer together. In these type of conditions, reducing the speed (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: At last, a Federal program we can all support.
|
|
Dave Schuler brings our attention to: (...) -> 1. Five years experience as a healer (meaning that -> close to half of their professional time has been -> spent providing energy healing, spiritual healing, -> prayer, or shamanic healing to (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
|
(...) What would be cool is signage that responds to the weather. Based on the temperature and state of precipitation (or even reflective characteristics of the road and atmospheric light-transmission characteristics), the signs could display a (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
|
(...) Hmm Civil engineering. This does work for some roads, but, for most, the 85th percentile speed just keeps rising (if my memory serves my right). For most roads, all the 85th percentile rule shows is that 15 percent of drivers are willing to (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | At last, a Federal program we can all support.
|
|
(URL) Ms. Targ has received $243,228.00 from the NIH to fund her bogus study, representing the first installment on what is likely to "amount to more than 2 million dollars of federal funds over the next few years." This quote is pulled from (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snip> The theory of how to set speeds isn't just some neato thing I dreamed up, it's commonly accepted practice, as outlined in Transportation Engineering texts... you can look it up or take (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't Drive 65 (was 'Re: Tolerance of vice')
|
|
(...) Who are smart enough to know what level or risk is appropriate in all situations. Right? (...) The 'correct' speed. (...) What Larry is saying is that while they might be exceeding the posted speed limit, the problem is that the posted speed (...) (23 years ago, 29-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
