 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) countries. (...) Maybe I used the term special interest incorrectly. I think of a special interest as being any sub-group of the population who wants public monies distributed in a certain way such that it will specifically help their sub (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | (...) how do you figure? i think a 25% infection rate with all offspring produced after infection of the parent being affected would set some alarms off for the possibility of a local extinction. Especially if you figure that the infection rate has (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | | This is somewhat rambling, but here goes... (...) But it doesn't HAVE to go on - all you have to do is force the damned idea through their heads that SEX (and sharing needles) CAN KILL, so either stay monogamous, or use condoms, or just use your own (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | (...) Sorry, I should have added to my post(s) that I do not support the giving/using of life-prolonging drugs that would result in the situation Tom just described above. (thought about when i started to write and promptly forgot about it :/ ). (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Are there any population ecologists out there? Could it be that when there gets to be too many of a given organism in a localle, and predation isn't taking care of it, diseases become a likely vector for population control. Maybe (if AIDS (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Peter White
|
| | | | | | | (...) In Australia, the number of newly infected has actually levelled out. Not sure if it was the education campaign that was aimed at the general population on prime-time TV here in the mid-eighties. (...) vector (...) organism (...) There are (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Agreed. Fortunately, ours isn't (slowly warming). At least that's what the data indicate when not interpreted by "junk science" advocates. (...) THIS one, now this one is something to worry about. Keep messing with the drug company profit (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) data (...) Everything I have read lately has been confirming that the world is indeed slowly warming (currently). Whether this is a natural phenomenon or not seems to be much more under debate. I'll ask my best personal source his opinions (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Pretty much everything I’ve read or seen indicates that scientists generally agree we are in a warming trend, but those scientists don’t agree on the ultimate effects of that warming. For that matter, they don’t even agree whether it’s a (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm not sure, but I suspect everyone doing research is in one camp or the other. Myself I'm on the "it's part of the cyclical nature of climate" side of the fence, I tend to suspect that we're still in the "emerging from the little Ice Age" (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Does it matter why? There is a global warming going in as we speak. There is a very fair chance that in a few years, the icecaps will melt and all the major coast cities (NYC, Boston, LA, SF, need I continue?) will be flooded. Does it really (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Ice (...) Oh please. Do the math. To me, "flooding" means a change in sea level of 20 feet or so. That's not going to happen. There isn't enough ice even if both icecaps melted down to nothing. The apocalyptic visions of the gloom and doom (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) a (...) Au Contraire: "If larger ice sheets begin to recede, sea level could rise rapidly and dramatically. The most vulnerable ice sheet is the marine-based West Antarctic Ice Sheet which contains enough water locked up as ice to raise global (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Jeff is correct. See my last post(5623). For general information- scientists measure the amount of ice on the planet at a given time by looking at oxygen isotope ratio in deepsea sediment cores. ^16-O is selectively stored in ice over the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Which is enough to cover most of the coastal cities all over the world. (...) Well, I don't know exactly how many years. (...) I don't believe everything I read, no. I do believe researches that are well based on facts, yes. (...) Me too. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Shiri Dori writes: I give on the icecaps, ok? If they all melt at once, we're all going wading. You still have to show that they're all going to melt, though. Won't take much, a few degrees higher average temp should do (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Well, it's not just the icecaps--it'll rain a lot more, too! 8^) (...) Not to blast Shiri, but in an effort to be fair to those teachers, perhaps the lesson was that the area was covered by seawater, but it was due to the fact that the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Many grade school teachers don't know squat about science, I once got an email from a concerned parent because her son's teacher was telling the students that the grand canyon was formed by a meteorite, as opposed to the less obvious river.... (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) IIRC, the 'trends' have been measured as 1 degree celsius (1.8 F) over the past [hundred I think] years. (Dang, wish I had some sources; but I never kept my notes...) The years might be way off, but it's definitely not more than 100; if (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) That data is suspect. 100 years ago we did not have the technology to determine what the temperature was in a repeatable way over enough sample points to determine what the average temperature is at a given location. We've had that technology (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The determinations of temperature prior to accurate, systematic measurements by humans are derived from other environmental evidence, rather than simply noting what the thermometer said 150 years ago. I regret that I don’t have the particulars (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) They are plenty of ways to confidently estimate temperture. I'm looking at a graph I'm placing into a report right now that has sea-surface temperature estimates off the coast of California back to 130 kyears ago. As Dave said, they are other (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) No, it isn't. And the mob agrees. There is no way that Joe Average is going to give up his petrol and plastics and lots of electricity even if it does mean that we'll leave the Earth a burnt-out husk. (...) I think that there are specific and (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) feet (...) That entirely depends on the geology of the local area - it could be sea level changes or it could be the land itself varying due to tectonic activity (trust a Californian to think along these lines). Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) There's Bruce again with his faulty logic! 8^) Dave! (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) level (...) (trust (...) Are you thrusting the fault onto me? You dip, I'll strike you. Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) LOL!!! It's like the cafeteria at the US Geological Survey... umm, why can't i remember any good geology jokes... -chris (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The schist you say! Okay, no more mister gneiss guy if you are going to drag the whole U.S. Geologic Survey. But I'll bet their busy playing with their orogenous zones. Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ROTL!!! that's too much... stop it!!! you are definately boulder than me when it comes to geology puns. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Comes from being stoned all the time. But hey, I getta get my rocks off somehow. Bruce (...) drag (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Because there aren't any? <grins, ducks and runs> (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) a (...) Half or so of Australia was under water at one point. Admittedly, Australia is pretty darn flat. I'd also be pretty nervous about the long-term land prices in Florida. The geologic record is pretty clear that major flooding happens. (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) IF changing them will make a difference, and IF it's worth the price. I'd vote for letting Florida flood, if it came to that, before I voted to give up electricity and antibiotics. When thinking about the global climate engine and our impact I (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) The panderer's the one with the fundraising problems, while the idiot is the one with the misperceptions regarding social issues. Does that clear it up? 8^) Dave! followups to OT-Fun (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Wait!?! Wouldn't the panderer be the one WITHOUT fund-raising problems? Or should I revert to cynicism and simply amend that to the *successful* panderer? Politician - panderer, they are not two different words! :-) Bruce (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Panderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) And despite our hopes, the Giant Pander is nowhere near endangered, and they rather seem to enjoy breeding in captivity. groan, LFB XFUT->.o-t.pun (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Punderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) the (...) up? (...) panderer? (...) rather (...) You missed your opportunity. Note the new subject. (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Punderers and Idiots (was re: Global Warming) —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Punderers and Idiots? That's like night and day! Right, Lindsay? Tell him... we're--we're, we're <stifiling sob>... we're not idiots <sniff>... Well, the Pander bears have kelp me from seal-ping at nights... Oh deer, I've been hearing the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) That's why I put the "might" up there. We are in agreement. (...) That's why I said we need to search out alternatives before we are faced with such a choice. But then again, I'm sick of the Florida Hurricanes winning the NCAA title all the (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) well, i didn't do the math but some other researchers have: (URL) maximum sea-level rise from the complete melting of these bodies of ice would be about 264 feet- that's about flooding times 13 by your definition above. There has be a lot of (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Reason number one being that burning hydrocarbons is a huge waste of precious chemical feedstocks... the stocks used to make ABS, for example. Every mile you drive is a brick not made, or something like that. :-) ...and number two being that (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I won't bite, cause I agree... I also seem to recall (though I have no proof, someone?) that it's LESS radioactive than coal! :P how's that for bait? Dan (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Heck yeah fission is cleaner. We always seem to be worried about what to do with the spent rods - why not drop them into the sun? It's not like it's going to pollute the sun or anything, and the canisters wouldn't need much of a boost at all. I was (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Back in college, I was researching power technologies a bit for SF RPGs. I remember that there was some theoretical maximum efficiency for solar panels which I'm pretty sure was less than 50% (might have even less than 25%). It's pretty clear (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Part of the objection to this scheme stems from the (currently) prohibitive expense of such launches, as well as the perceived potential for wide scattering of radioactive waste in the event of a disastrous launch. Granted, both of these (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Booster blows up - you now have radioactive material spread over an extremely wide area. And to make the launch somewhat econonomically feasible, you packed it to the max. Thankfully, it took off from Florida (which if we recall, is going to (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) packed (...) Which is worse, losing 3 dolphins or all of California? Mmmm, gotta get back to you on that one. ++Lar (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | That's assuming we'd use boosters, of course. I figure railguns would be more foolproof. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Rule Number 1: If you make something foolproof, they'll only go out and invent a better fool. :-) (Actually, until the working railgun exists, missles are the only option, and even getting teeny-tiny reactors for deep-space satellites takes an (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Maybe we use too much energy then. We waste so much electricity. Many of the modern TV's use energy to keep the picture tube warm will it is off. I don't know how much this is but, since I began to unplug my television when I am not using it, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Rich Manzo
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Ice (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I work for the US Geological Survey's Climate History Team. I would say that we our research is respectable and legitimate. I have never seen a case of 'junk science' in my two years of employ here. For a look at our research visit: (URL) do (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | | (...) ummm.... try reading this: (URL) especially the first sentance. also (URL) you mean that the world is 'warming quickly' as opposed to 'slowly warming', I will have to disagree with you. The earth is still in rebound from the last ice age. It (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's an awfully tall order, considering that we have billions of years of instinctual programming to overcome. (...) I.E. The Ugly and Unpopular will inherit the earth... ;) Jeff (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | (...) Me = B.S. Ecology and Evolution specializing in quantitative genetics and population genetics. I start grad school in the fall working on population ecology and conservation genetics. Is that close enough? (...) Maybe... When a population that (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Uh, sure. I was mostly kidding, but that's cool! Good luck with grad school. (...) vector (...) organism (...) [snip a tentative agreement to the first half of my conjecture] (...) I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that it's (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | (...) Thanks! (...) Umm.. It's possible. There is certainaly variation in how people conduct their sexual lives, but I am not sure if that is genetically or socially induced. Maybe a little of both. So where does the 'weak abstinance gene' arrise (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm sure (well, as sure as I can be with no real evidence, so take this to mean that it seems exremely likely) that sexuality is controlled both by genetic and environmental factors. I guess the way I named the "weak abstinence gene" it (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | Christopher Weeks wrote: <snip> (...) Ok- I'll assume. This may spawn a separate discussion, but did anyone read that 'natural history of rape' book that made a lot of headlines a few months ago. i haven't read it yet, but i have read some other (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I think I was mixing the way that I was using the phrase "in the interest of." Obviously organisms don't know what's in their species' "best interest" in terms of adaptability. I'd revise my statement above to be something like: It is probably (...) (24 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | (...) I understood that, I have probably been influenced/corrupted by Richard Dawkins... (...) perhaps. I guess that would fall under artificial selection. I think we may be bordering on eugenics here, which has its own set of problems. (...) true, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | | | | (...) for further worries... (URL) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Fish :-( (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) feeding (...) caught, has advocates, and will be slow to ruin the whole of the lake. I guess we'll wait and see. Chris (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I don't know. That explanation seems plausible especially given how SEAsian river fish behave given the option of a current. You have to be a pretty hard-core cichlidiot to keep track of all the different P.zebra strains. But I raised (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) heard (...) As I understand it, infection by the father isn't transmitted via conception at all. And, for reasons somewhat unknown, HIV infected mothers frequently produce babies without infection. So, your premis isn't correct. (...) But even (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | (...) What leads you to think that? The infected people are not all dying very soon. Some (many) of them do not know they are infected, and many of them do not know how to prevent transmitting HIV. They will continue to pass it on, and probably for (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | (...) Several things are concurrently happening. Some of them are dying. Such an alarming number of them are sick, that their broken social system that has thus far not provided a socially acceptable method of teaching basic health and safty topic (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) The ones who listen to the education and change their habits will live and those who don't won't. Heartlessly simple, but then, that's evolution in action for you... It will only take a few generations. In geological time, that's "shortly". (...) (24 years ago, 8-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | (...) Unless, of course, widespread plague causes civilization to break down. Then, the ones who listen to the education *and* successfully dodge the bullets will survive. Witness what happened to the Jews during the Black Plague. Cheers, - jsproat (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | (...) Are you suggesting this as a real possibility, or as a logical argument to Larry's point? Chris (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | | (...) Then, (...) will (...) A logical argument to Larry's point. Plagues have a habit of overthrowing society. It's also a real possibility, of course, though not necessarily a probable one. Certainly not probable on a large enough scale to pose a (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | (...) The destablization of countries not a threat to US National Security? The loss of a quarter of a country's workforce would destroy its economy. This could damage the economy of neighboring countries or those that back them financially. With (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) No. Not in the general case it isn't. Sorry about that. ++Lar (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | (...) Explain please. Jeff (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) We're not the worlds policeman. While the destabilization of, for example, Liberia, may be quite saddening to watch, it's not going to have a long term large impact on us. There is nothing that Liberia has that is a vital interest to us. The (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, it does: Our Fellow Man. (...) Actually, it would probably heavily damage our economy. (...) While true, it is rather hard to say just what would happen when a country destabilized. Therefore, it is better to be safe than sorry. (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I don't think that counts. If the government believed that 'our fellow man' was a vital interest, things would be very different. Since they aren't, then it must not be so. (...) Nah. I'm no economist, but I bet we'd go on fine after hitting (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Hypothetically speaking, of course. And hypothetically, I agree. In the specific case, I disagree. the virus is too hard to transmit for it to become a plague. I wouldn't even call it an epidemic, much less a pandemic. Now, if the virus (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher Tracey
|
| | | | (...) Ok, the virus does mutate. the mutation rate for the genes that code for the protein coat is about 15%/8 years. Compare this to the divergence rate in almost any gene between a person and a chimpanzee which is about 2%/several million years. (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) This is a good point that hasn't been discussed much here. The likelihood of progress should go into the cost-benefit analysis. OTOH, if the techniques developped for Polio worked for HIV, it'd be under control by now, right? Since that's not (...) (24 years ago, 10-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
