 | | Re: 6 degrees of separation..
|
|
(...) unambiguously what this information tells us about our own government? -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Okinawa, a foretaste of invading the main islands..
|
|
(URL) forgot how ferocious the battle for Okinawa actually was... but the real point of this article lies elsewhere. Moral relativism is a bankrupt idea. (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 6 degrees of separation..
|
|
Paul was a PM on a project I was on when we were both at CTP: (URL) have heard his story first hand. Pretty chilling. (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
(...) Then what was that place the tourist operator took me to???? ...Oh... And I didn't wear any tartan the entire time I was there ... Crawford tartan is so blechy. McIntyre (my mum's side) is much nicer. ROSCO (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) any) (...) it's (...) That's possible, but doesn't stop evolution within the species. (...) We'll need some fairly large colonies before earth becomes expendable (IMO). (...) "Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability. (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I don't really think it's cause for "optimism" -- in my book the longer it takes before genetic manipulation of humans is commonplace the better! But a lot of these processes are technologically feasible today, which is why I put such a short (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta loveOracle...)
|
|
(...) Fixed how? The solution I favor is to lift those restrictions. (...) It IS appropriate to compare US states because we're not giving up our right to keep and bear arms. Whether or not you think it's safer without them, we are committed to (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 'work of neo-Nazis' (Re: Anthrax Info)
|
|
(...) I tend to think that the fact that we allow them their proper freedoms is the reason that we generally have little problem with them. Chris (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) Science News. It's thin. It's weekly. It summarizes the findings from all the real journals with enough reference that you can go get the whole article if you want to. And you can always pick up the especially interesting Scientific American (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) God, how I hope you're right! But I'm less optimistic than you. Chris (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta loveOracle...)
|
|
(...) OK, if it is easier to get an illegal gun in states that have restrictions on who can and how he can legally obtain a gun, then, of course, this needs to be fixed, too. (...) I was talking about *legal* ways for criminals to get guns. And to (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 'work of neo-Nazis' (Re: Anthrax Info)
|
|
(...) True or not, I have always been amazed by how much you in the US allow neo-Nazis to abuse the freedom they have. For historical reasons, this is a bit different in Europe, and especially in Germany. However, this of course does not mean we (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I think these points interact in an interesting way. (...) I'm no physiologist, and this is largely based on mediocre SF, but I think it's quite possible that humans will evolve rapidly as a response to low gravity conditions (if that's not a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
(...) (il)logical extreme, should we have the right to stop movies being made depicting our culture? I suppose Scottish examples would be "Braveheart", "Whisky Galore" or even “Brigadoon” (prospective tartan clad tourists please note the place does (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
(...) reposting my debatable comments (...) Why is it more absurd than a corporation's claim to a trademark? Note that the Treaty of Waitangi (1840) (URL) acknowledges Maori entitlement to cultural heritage, which includes their language. (URL) LEGO (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
(...) An interesting notion. Is this a common argument? (...) But why should they care any more than you do? I'm sure that there are a lot of ethnic European people around the world, but I feel no particular responsibility for them. If the "*very* (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Cultures, words, meanings and ownership (was Was Re: "piffle!" (bowdlerised for your protection)
|
|
John's right, this IS debate fodder. He should have set XFUT, but I will. XFUT o-t.debate and let's keep it out of other groups if it veers into the subject areas... that would be my strong preference and I suspect many others as well. Just a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.technic.bionicle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) I thought this was an interesting perspective: From the OU ==+== Infant mortality is a thing of the past, major diseases are treatable and natural disasters largely avoidable, so the merciless selective forces of nature are something of an (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is Larry a Creationist? 8^) Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Ack. I mean the surfacing of traits already in the population (and not newly mutation generated) when I said micro... and the longterm generation/selection of new traits (and speciation) when I said macro. Sorry if that was imprecise. I ain't (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is Larry a Creationist? 8^) Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Ciprox in particular, but antibiotics in general are overused. But my understanding is that "macroevolution" is a straw-man term coined, or at least embraced, by Creationists. All evolution is microevolution except on the geologic scale, and (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Not a bad point, but it must be stipulated that since humanity is *part* of nature, then the traits we, as agents of nature, elect to favor will survive and be passed on in a manner exactly consistent with evolution. I'm not sure that the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) Well, if you're only looking to maintain the status quo of scientific integrity, Weekly World News isn't too much of a leap away from Discover! I don't follow many science journals too regularly, though I'll pick up an occasional Scientific (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Macroevolution, yes. Microevolution, no. (which is why switching away from Ciprox is a good idea, hold it in reserve if we can) (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) "Dead end" has an air of finality that can't be declared with any confidence when speaking of evolution. It may be the case, though I don't think so, that we've created a temporary stall on evolution, but even then, it's not world-wide, and (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) to (...) Have you read the novels "Last and First Men" and "Starmaker" by Olaf Stapledon? They deal with exactly those issues but on a grand scale, and are *exceptionally* humbling reads. Highly recommended! Jennifer (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) We get New Scientist, it tends to be a bit "current" but it is a good read. The range of articles in it means one can spend and afternoon with it, or just a cup of coffee. It does not have the depth of Scientific American, but the detail is (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Confused?...
|
|
Tut Tut Santosh, I thought I was cynical. Next you will be telling us this war is also about Central Asian oil & gas, that Bush met with the Taleban before he was elected, that Unacol proposed the pipeline across Afghanistan, that Unocal (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Doing the Discover Mag Rag (Was: At last, a Federal program we can all support.)
|
|
(...) I would favor Scientific American but that's just because I've never read the other two. I find SA to be a very absorbing read. But it's not a read while watching TV sort of rag, you need to give it your full attention to get what the articles (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of Humanity (was: lotsa stuff)
|
|
(...) Right. Or at least closer. What I'm getting at is that evolution is a natural process that produces changes in organisms in response to changes in environment (including the changes that occur in other organisms) but that we are now choosing, (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Confused?...
|
|
Talk about double standards... Saw this on another forum, apparently its been emailed about. Confused? Having difficulty telling the good guys from the bad guys? Use this handy guide to differences between Terrorists and the U.S. Government: (...) (23 years ago, 30-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
