 | | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
Bruce and Lindsay are both right. (...) Agreed. Although I would argue that it's more likely in some systems than others... (c.f. the wacky trait inheritance theories popular in the SovUnion under Stalin which were there to please him, supposedly) (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Stories (was Re: Remote Control Figures? (Was Re: Bionicle Sets))
|
|
(...) Yes, but to be honest, I'm not sure it's off-topic and thus I don't think it needs to be relegated to .o-t.debate. Best to keep it where it is (er, was...), where LEGO-interested folks will continue to comment. (But for actual o-t xposts, you (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Stories (was Re: Remote Control Figures? (Was Re: Bionicle Sets))
|
|
(...) I hope my ambivalence on the subject is clear. I, too, have always preferred the minifigures without names and without predefined stories, enemies, etc. However is the pleasure I take in the Star Wars line based solely on the strength of the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) I'm making the jump that this would not be an issue under Libertarian non-government schools. We'd have a bunch of scientific morons in the Creationist schools, which is why I say on the theoritical level. You are correct in my estimation that (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) How is Larry's viewpoint necessarily Libertarian? Libertarians can espouse good science, but espousing good science (and freedom) is not necessarily Libertarian (though it can't hurt). :) best LFB (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) It tells one a lot about the scientific profession--and academia in general--when things like that happen. Thanks to Jeremy for providing the cites; I read both the "original" and the followup in National Geographic. As in religion, vanity can (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) Kinda throws things into confusion, but it also reminds everyone to be wary. (...) Pretty much. If they want to seize on the small number of fakes, they'll have to answer to the large number of fake faith healers as a disproof of God. I don't (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
My God! Someone actually noted a source! Miracles do happen! :-) My wife has been on a anti-packrat campaign of late (me) and has been tossing my National Geographics when the new one comes in, whether I've read it or not. I'll have to go back and (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
|
|
Dave Low <stinglessbee@hotSPA...Email.com> wrote in message news:G80HMz.7vD@lugnet.com... (...) knows (...) in (...) haven't (...) which (...) dictating (...) we'll (...) an (...) talking (...) choosing my (...) absolutely (...) our path (...) (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) Fakes happen. Defaking stuff is fun, as Bruce alludes to. Investigating why people do fakes is interesting. But the question is not whether a particular observation is faked. The question, rather, is whether there the preponderance of evidence (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Fake Fossil (Was: Problems with Darwin's theory)
|
|
(...) Sorry -- I wasn't aiming that one at anyone specifically -- just hoping for some colattoral damage. An old nasty habit. :-, (...) Wow, chilly. Touche. OK, I thought that since you were familiar with the first Geographic article ("Feathered (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) I don't claim that God didn't make everything. I'm only concerned here with the evidence on hand on what happened. I'm not addressing whether it was directed by God in any fashion or not, but simply what actually took place. (...) If it's (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) how incredibly undeniably ludicrous it is to punish someone for pretending poultry is a gun, let's focus on the scary comment in the last paragraph: "Sullivan said punishment for a threat "depends on the tone, the demeanor, and in some manner (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
A fascinating discussion, from the POV of one who believes in both evolution and creationism. It's also a bit amusing to find that so many on both sides apparently (1) reject the notion that it's a little bit of both. But anyway, concerning the fake (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) It should be extremely obvious what I mean, except for someone doing their best to dodge the point. (...) November 98, if I recall. (...) By all means, share your source for it being a fake. (...) You don't admit beating your wife, is the (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Let's not even start that ugly debate again. I've still got scars. Dave! (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) OK. (although it's no more "my" theory than GR is "my" theory...) (...) You claim we haven't provided evidence refuting it. Yet we have discussed the wide variety of fossils, the different ages of various fossils, the transitional fossils, (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Even if he hasn't, I have, and I ask you what does it prove? Bruce, DaveL, and I (among many others) have stated for months that one of the primary strengths of science is its ability to modify itself to provide an increasingly complete (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) What do mean? You've never seen National Geographic? You don't consider it a scientific source? You're not familiar with the reptile/bird fake? All the various evolutionist who were fawning all over it aren't scientists? You don't admit that (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) You're kidding, right? Read the liner notes on the 2112 album. :-) ++Lar (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) For starters, that's not a fair question, and you know it. ("Why do you beat your wife?" being the classic example.) Further, I never said anything about proving creation. Please re-read. SRC (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Then we agree about (IMHO) the really important part - judging actions not intent. I highly suspect what we're debating for the rest of it is fluff and semantics. <snip examples> (...) Good examples, and a solid case for the relevance of (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Larry listens to RUSH? That's a shock ;-) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) I don't care how old he is. Suspension is a bit severe for pointing a piece of *POULTRY* at someone. Imagine trying to defend feeling so threatened by someone pointing a peice of (presumably boneless, even) food at you that you wanted to get a (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) I agree. Clearly it let *you* down somewhere along the line, at least in a minor way. :-) (Way to mess up on the too/to thingie, eric. Don't you hate it when that happens to a post you wrote? I do too. It happens too much. ) (an eric slips (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) Oh, Tim. That was fowl. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) I think you're too chicken to blame the school system. (now don't get saucy with me) ;) -Tim (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) DaveE (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) Sure, have a talk with him. Yes, discuss things and talk to him about why it's inappropriate to be casual with mock violence. Suspension is just a bit severe for an 8 year old. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(...) school (which is good), you are not allowed to think about a gun. Thought police. Wonderful. Yet another reason the USA's public school system is way to messed up. eric (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Let's modify it a bit: I come over to your house taking donations for the home for wayward boys. You ask about my morals. Now I say I plan to teach them the ways of Christ and bring them up as devout Christians. How much money do you give? (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Keeping Our Schools Safe
|
|
(URL) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Sure it does. Ever heard of Morganucodon? Why the heck did the ossicles of your ear start to develop in your mandibula and successivly moved into your ear during your embryonal development? Because this reflects your phylogeny - the ear (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) think. :-) (...) Good question. I freely admit I may be digging myself a hole here. And judging morality of individuals, in general, isn't what I want to do. Especially as it relates to victimless crimes, etc. Recall that I've said in the past (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) I guess what I'm stumbling over is trying to figure out why you think/feel that morality has significance beyond a personal level. What is the justification/point/meaning of you judging me (or my morals)? Whether it's a personal standard or an (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
Snipped a lot of head twisting stuff to just answer two questions, then I HAVE to get back to writing docs... more later, maybe. (...) Yes. (...) I can't accurately answer that hypothetical. It's indeterminate since I don't accept the premise and (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Ah, ok. So what you're objecting to is specifically my method of moral judgement, instead proposing that some unspecified (at least at present) yet universal code is a better tool for judging morality, and that you have at least some inkling (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Ok. I think that 'morality...derived from enforcement' and 'whatever you have the power to do is OK' are equivalent statements, but that's just quibbling. (...) That consequence does follow fairly directly, so I guess that's where it fails for (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Right, I understand that concept. I just don't find it valid. Because I don't accept relative morality. (...) Yes. (...) I don't think that's what I am saying, but since I haven't provided a derivation for universal morality I guess that might (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Ah, then ok. I'm fine with that. Just so long as we make sure to clarify that the 'right' in MMR isn't a moral right. The only problem being, though, that while theoretically true, it's not the case in reality, only because human moral codes (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes: Snip. (...) I would not agree with the above definition, but rather offer this one instead: MMR is the belief that there *is* no morality. whatever you have the power to do is OK, with no objective (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) No, I think you've got it backwards. Moral relativism is (essentially) stating that morality is subjective & internal, while 'might makes right' is stating that moral action is anything that can be enforced. I've started to go further about (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) ? Maybe I'm missing the point here, but I don't see that connection-- I.E. that "might makes right"... What do you mean by "right"? If you mean "moral" then no. If you mean "not immoral" then yes. But then again, 'weak' would make right too... (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Yep. That is a good summation of both David's position and mine, I think. Now back to might makes right... *isn't* moral relativism a kind of "might makes right"? I think it is (without too much, if any, twisting) and that's one of my issues (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) It could be twisted into meaning that, I suppose, but just about anything can be twisted around until it supports a 'might makes right' mindset. It boils down to relative morality. When David talks about someone acting morally (or (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
|
(...) Ah-- so (once again I'll try) your logic goes something like this: 1. There were predictions made 2. These predictions prove true in the Bible 3. No human is likely to have been able to accurately make these predictions 4. Therefore something (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Well, obviously you won't take too keenly to the theory to begin with, BUT, since you asked :) Let's look at our society. Take theft for example. Suppose there was someone who didn't believe in the right to own physical property. He couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Further, there is no one "literal" interpretation of the Bible, since every conscious reader will by necessity arrive at a different interpretation, just as with any text. Dave! (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) As Bruce and I have pointed out countless times previously, *EVERY* organism that ever lived is a transitional form, fossil or otherwise. Further, my "ad infinitum" comment is a straightforward rhetorical consequence of demanding a (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Even more interesting to me is the question of why creationists feel compelled to "prove" their mythology using the very science that their mythology invalidates by definition. Dave! (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
|
|
(...) Can God actually be limited to our subjective experience? Assuming that our path is unique in the near infinity of possible universes, all of which God understands totally, is it actually possible for God to comprehend how linear this (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Franks writes: Some more thoughts: (...) Here's another "convenient" explanation. Life consists of the most successful organisms as constrained by environment and history. Obviously some organisms are very (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) And the improvements often come in big jumps -- or lots of little jumps. It happens when a gene successfully strays away from the local maxima that it's been stuck on and climbs to a new local maxima. In n-dimensional space, there are very few (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) I just do not see it that way, except to the level of having faith in the basic evidence of one's senses, in the chain of verifiabillty (I am reasonably certain that Brazil exists based on verifiability), and in the prowess of logic. No theory (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Well, this is an interesting take! Do expound, sounds like fertile ground for discussion, unlike creationism. I would think that property and rights are inventions before I'd think they were myths. ++Lar (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
Hi, (...) If you think of the number of animals that have existed over the previous X million years, and the small fraction of these whose remains have survived to exist as fossils, and the smaller fraction of these which actually have been found (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
(...) (Comments addressed to Richard, but obviously people can jump in if they think there is something relevant to add. Since I gratuitously posted my initial response to the newsgroup I think it's fair that I should post my more rational apology (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Democracy, individual human rights and the concept of "property" are all myths too, and myths with much shorter history in human culture than the idea of a divine creator. They're also less rational than belief in God. If we accept a literal (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) I have seen no such claims in any scientific source. (...) I listed those for human evolution from hominids to current man. That's the family/genus/species record. (...) A cat didn't evolve into a dog or vica versa. (...) It's hard to see with (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Go ahead and do so... (...) I am having a lot of trouble with this notion. It smacks of might makes right. <snip> (...) Yes, it so much more convenient to already have "lost", don't you think? ++Lar (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
Snippety Snip. (...) Faked, faked... always with this faked. You sound like a broken record. Everything that you can't explain away must be faked, right? I found this quote from one of the creationist resources rather interesting((URL) By basing our (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Ad infinitum? No I won't. The only links I've heard of have been faked. The recent reptile/bird fake that made the cover? of National Geographic being a great example. If cats really evolved from dogs (my example - feel free to adjust it to (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
|
(...) Oh? So Nostradamus was God? His prophecies have been as accurate or more accurate. It's all in the interpretation. The more vague the prophecy, the easier it is to link to actual events. Nostr even predicted Bush becoming president ;-) (...) (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism
|
|
(...) A large part of the Bible is fulfilled prophecy. Only God can prophecy because he isn't bounded by time like we are. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt AFAIK. (...) Can we try being just a BIT more objective? 8-) As you said, my main objection (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Evolution - Impossible!
|
|
(...) Coupled with the evidence I heard that mamalian amino acids appeared to have come from space as well (I.E. specifically mamalian amino acids didn't develop here on Earth), it makes even more sense. Also with the fact that both here and on (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Evolution - Impossible!
|
|
I have seen ET, and we is he! ;-) Actually, considering the vast #s of chemicals/compounds available in the Soup of Space, it would not surprise me at all to find out that life here originated from Seed Matter from space. After all, the universe had (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Evolution - Impossible!
|
|
(...) (URL) Dave! (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Macro-Evolution - Impossible!
|
|
(...) and what little does is some 40 years old--the palaeontological equivalent of considering an IBM PC-XT "cutting edge" in 2001, just because it's only a dozen or so years old. It's selective misinformation--Kitts's work is even older, mostly in (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Hmm... actually I'm not sure anymore what parts voice it best... I think I tried to sum it up at the bottomish part of: (URL) a lot of that was expounded upon in the (vastly long) thread that followed... so I don't think it goes into as much (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Education (was: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs)
|
|
(...) I see no contradiction in what I am saying. I/you/we are mixing school/higher education. The UK system provides education up to the 16. It is required that parents provide their children with education - the default is the state system. Within (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Ah-- then we shall certainly have differences. My own moral theory arrives at the conclusion that there are no absolutes in morality. (...) And I'd argue that it CAN be. Not necessarily that it's EVER actually BEEN ok, but that the possibility (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Education (was: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs)
|
|
(...) Ack! In the past you have repeatedly advocated that education should be doled out in quantities proportional to the ability to learn. Now you are saying that it should be equal. Just for clarity, which of these stances do you actually agree (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) I noted that you had expressed this moral theory in another thread but I didn't backtrack far enough to find it. Can you point me to the post? (...) Does it come down to behavior x is only immoral when those doing the behaving think that it (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
Snip most, hope to come back later... address a tiny fraction. (...) We differ strongly. I suspect this is moral relativism. I reject that... I go even farther than rejection. I think there are moral absolutes and no government, even with the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) At the risk of being accused of jury tampering by making you aware of your rights and duties as a juror(1), check this out: (URL) discusses "jury nullification". This is a unique power that American jurors have... to find a defendent innocent (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Well, difference of opinion on our parts, I think. By my moral theory, slavery is not necessarily morally wrong. Is that to say that I think slavery in the US wasn't wrong? No. In fact, I'm pretty sure it WAS wrong. Basically, my morality (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Yes, I tricked her into it by bringing up the topic and not actually saying the magic word. :-) (actually I think that counts as a loss too. LOL) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs
|
|
(...) I think, from a UK perspective, it is a good idea to aim to give kids an equal level of education. However, supplying equal $/head is a very simplistic way of doing this - unless we assume kids are a mass produced homogenous product. The cost (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) While I tend to be on the side of "work within the system" over "revolt", I am glad that some people feel so strongly about their cause they are willing to go to jail for it. In fact, I am glad about this even when I don't agree with their (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs
|
|
(...) One thing which to my mind makes property tax supported schools at least somewhat palatable is that in most parts of the country you do have at least some choice as to how much property tax you will pay, and what kind of school system (of (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
Shiri Dori wrote: <snip> (...) Oops.. you just lost the debate... :-) :-) :-) Frank (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
Snippy snip (...) Can you elaborate on this? Slavery is morally wrong and it doesn't matter to me what the law says about it. A government that abides it (yes, even the US government of the time) doesn't have consent of the governed in that area, (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Hmm.. not necessarily, but most probably. Mostly it's to say that I don't have a problem with you breaking the law, so long as you don't put moral fault on the government for punishing your lack of adherence to it. Basically, should those who (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) d'Oh. Shame on me. I mean when *buf == '\0'. :-) --Todd (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Yep, I can totally see that. For God's sake, I don't think that one should *always* abide by the laws, especially when reaching such atrocities like your example. Larry has a point too there, when the law just goes too far then I'd rather not (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) Might wanna throw in a comment at the top stating that behavior is undefined (and may even result in a segmentation fault) if fixURL(buf) is called when *buf == "\0". As written above, code assumes that strlen(buf) >= 1. --Todd (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs
|
|
(...) I'm biased. I live in Ada, Amway pays a lot of my school taxes, and I have a lot of friends and relatives that work for Amway (the corporate entity) in various capacities, including my sister-in-law, several nonLEGO good friends and my LEGO (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Amway/Quixtar/MLMs
|
|
I don't have the direct personal experience, but one of my wife's neighbors was in Amway, and ended up having to declare bankruptcy - the minimum order sizes necessary to get anything meant they ended up with a huge stock of stuff they couldn't sell (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Amway/Quixtar/MLMs
|
|
As loathe as I am to generate any more posting traffic in off-topic.debate, I have something to ask of Lugnetters that I know doesn't belong anyplace else. I have a friend who has become involved in a MLM- Quixtar, to be exact. I want to dissuade (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
If you guys want to continue this, please do it in debate; don't plug up .castle with this kind of babble. Thanks, -Chris FUT .off-topic.debate (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kevin Loch writes: Of course that should be: fixURL(char *buf) { int urlsize; urlsize=strlen(buf); if ((buf[urlsize]-1] != '/') && (urlsize < BUFSIZE-1)) { buf[urlsize]='/'; buf[urlsize+1]=0; } (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
I think we've been through this before. The reason that /foo/bar and /foo/bar/ are almost always synonymous is because most content (even dynamic) is filesystem based. That means you can have either the file "bar" or directory "bar" in directory (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
(...) If you regard it as such, then why bother to respond. Other than to simply insult? (...) Who are you to determine what content is worthy of discussion, especially since it doesn’t even concern you. If it was not “worthy of public discussion” (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Personally I'm gonna have to go with Chris and Lar on this one... Most of the time, you're probably right. But it doesn't make it always so (At least I don't think so). My problem is two-fold: A. If the atrocity of the law reaches certain (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) When a law is unjust we are under no obligation to follow said law. It may not be worth breaking, but if it is, then there is nothing wrong with doing so. (...) Good for him. ;-) (...) I couldn't possibly disagree with you more. It was better (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) The humanity is very small part of the universe. Humanity can be good - there are just a few bugs that is all ;-) But I note your lack of confidence in you fellow man to do good - we must start a club. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) I think it is all relative - if our universe was the godly creation equivalent of assembling a Duplo kit then perhaps said deity would perhaps not be so deserving of respect. However, respect would certainly be true if our universe and (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
I mostly agree with Dave here... so I snipped most of it. (...) I don't see this as disruptive, not at all. I think if you're going to say "here is the explanation to everything", that a counter argument pointing out that the explanation doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) Ya, Shiri, what Frank said! Thanks for sharing. I don't have the personal experience with the environs of Thoreau and Emerson that Frank does, but you can be sure that this "work within the system" vs. "we need active revolution/active (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
(...) Pawel may well be 'tanned'. However, as he has both a Polish first and second name - I'd expect him no look rather European. I think you have taken too many Kung Fu kicks to the head! (...) Scott A (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
