Driver to drive?

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 03:10:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:

On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:54:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 10:30:09 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 18:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 02:33:56 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 05:16:27 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 12 October 2013 21:52:05 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Tell the truth.

I never do anything else.

Your claim is fatuous,

Scarcely. I could have written that I never post anything that I don't believe to be true, which has exactly the same information content.

It certainly does not, since the first case is unconditional and
states that you always tell the truth, while in the second you admit
that your belief that something is true might be flawed.

Since I'm the one that's deciding whether what I post is true, this is an academic distinction.

Ah, then, since later on in your post you admit that: "Of course I'm
aware that one's personal idiosyncrasies filter one's inputs.", you
should realize that that applies to you as well as to everyone else
and that your own idiosyncrasies may make you post what seems to you
to be true, but which - in reality - isn't.

Since I'd just said that I'm the one that decide whether what I post is true, your point is implicit in what I said, and - to any realistic observer - in what I originally posted.

Therefore, your statement that you never do anything but tell the
truth could be wrong.

I can certainly be wrong about it being true - as happens from time to time - but I can claim that I don't post anything that I don't believe to be true, which is all that is humanly possible to claim, and thus implicit in my original claim.

<snipped the rest of the pretentious nonsense>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 02:15:09 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly
got TB and polio under control until
religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

Those deaths were only because spooks got caught
actually using a vaccination team as a spy cover.

Since the religious zealots were claiming that vaccinations were actually a cover for a plot to sterilise Muslims, as opposed to a cover for spying, this seems unlikely.

Blaming that onto religious zealots
or anti-vaccination people is wrong.

Not an an impressively well-reasoned claim.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 18:30:14 UTC+11, Jamie M wrote:

On 10/14/2013 5:42 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 11:22:45 UTC+11, Jamie M wrote:
On 10/14/2013 6:07 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, 14 October 2013 17:37:32 UTC+11, Tim Williams wrote:
"Bill Sloman"<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2168babb-8c6f-4325-b413-e27484d54468@googlegroups.com...

<snip>

Check out this link, it shows how modern science based agriculture has
been proven to be inefficient and destructive compared to natural
grassland feeding animals.

Modern agriculture can be inefficient and unsustainable. Sadly, it's effective and productive. Good luck with your implicit program to persuade Americans to eat less meat.

> It has a reference to "Scientific American" in there.

I stopped subscribing to "The Scientific American" some years ago - the balance between science and journalism tilted a bit far to the journalistic side.

> http://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/grass-fed-beef-and-global-warming/

More frightening the reader for profit.

Its the same for the immune system, engineered solutions like vaccines
are inefficient and destructive too.

How are vaccines "inefficient"? In terms of lives saved and disabilities avoided per dollar expended, they seem to be the most effective medicines we have.

> There are epidemics of illness everywhere you look now, diabetes, dementia, > autism. These are all the products of what you consider "intelligent".

The high prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the USA reflects a remarkably stupid
unwillingness to tackle endemic obesity, which is a treatable condition.

The rising prevalence of dementia reflects the fact that more people are getting old enough to exhibit dementia before they drop dead. It might be intelligent to kill them younger, or offer them euthanasia when the syndrome becomes obvious, but we don't do that.

The rising prevalence of autism seems to reflect only an increasing willingness to diagnose the condition in children who would earlier have been regarded as shy and retiring. I don't consider this intelligent.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 10:30:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:58:50 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, 17 October 2013 03:10:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:54:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 10:30:09 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 18:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 02:33:56 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 05:16:27 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 12 October 2013 21:52:05 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Tell the truth.

I never do anything else.

Your claim is fatuous,

Scarcely. I could have written that I never post anything that I don't believe to be true, which has exactly the same information content.

snipped the rest of the pretentious nonsense

Thrash around as much as you like, your original response was a lie

Not true, but since you suffer from defective reading comprehension, you are not going to be able to work out why.

and, of course, you're trying to ameliorate its effect and save face
by saying, in effect, "Any rational being should have known what I
meant."

Precisely. Though not *any* rational being, only those that can parse English sentences correctly.

And I'm not "thrashing about", just pointing out why your deluded claim is false.

You're a cheat, Sloman, and the longer you post the tighter the noose
gets.

You're nitwit, Fields, and you haven't got enough sense to know when you are making it blindingly obvious.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Jamie M]

On 10/16/2013 2:30 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

On 16/10/2013 08:30, Jamie M wrote:
On 10/14/2013 5:42 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 11:22:45 UTC+11, Jamie M wrote:
On 10/14/2013 6:07 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:

If you did know a bit more, you'd be a liar, but since your intention
is to propagate your own dismal state of misinformation rather than to

maliciously misinform, you are merely a fool rather than a rogue.


Hi Bill,

Check out this link, it shows how modern science based agriculture has
been proven to be inefficient and destructive compared to natural
grassland feeding animals. It has a reference to scientific american in
there.

http://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/grass-fed-beef-and-global-warming/

Whilst grass fed beef certainly tastes better and massive overuse of
prophylactic antibiotics and growth hormones by US industrial meat
production is causing problems that report is strongly biassed.

Hi,

The UN just came out with a similar report entitled "wake up before its
too late"

Here's a bit on it from the Guardian:

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/sep/18/food-crisis-un-governments

It argues against industrial monoculture and supports switching to
decentralized small scale farming:

"The 2013 Trade and Environment Review, calls on governments to "wake up
before it is too late" and shift rapidly towards farming
models that promote a greater variety of crops, reduced fertiliser use
and stronger links between small farms and local consumers."

Here's a link to the pdf: (341 pages!)

http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pdf

US monoculture will come badly unstuck sooner or later since farmers are
wilfully ignoring good crop rotation practices and as a result soils are
damaged and weeds are also becoming RoundUp Ready(TM).

The soil damage is from tilling the soil, crop rotation is beneficial
especially when the soil is left untilled so the soil gains more organic
matter and less or no fertilizer is required.

Minimum inputs farming is a rational solution to maximising yield and
minimising environmental damage. Anything else is faddish junk science.

If you want to know how to make farms sustainable read about this guy,
the US department of agriculture calls him the "Obi-Wan Kenobi of
soil." and he is against tilling/fertilizer/GMO solutions as he knows they
are what destroy the soil.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/09/cover-crops-no-till-david-brandt-farms

Its the same for the immune system, engineered solutions like vaccines
are inefficient and destructive too. There are epidemics of illness

Vaccines are highly efficient. They were discovered as a result of the
anecdotal evidence that milk maids who got cowpox didn't get smallpox.
One of my maths teachers was one of the last people in the UK to catch
smallpox. He bore the scars for the rest of his life.

Variolation - a much higher risk method of crude vaccination against
smallpox was known to the Chinese and Indian cultures since the 10th
century. Jenner perfected it in the west from cowpox. His verification
of its efficacy would not be permitted under modern medical ethics.

everywhere you look now, diabetes, dementia, autism.. these are all the
products of what you consider "intelligent".

cheers,
Jamie

Diabetes is mainly due to the US habit of vastly overeating junk food
and huge amounts of high fructose corn syrup with everything. Dementia
increasing because we are living longer. You don't have to go too far
back to have infantile diseases killing a high proportion of all
children and TB and malaria seeing off the rest by about 40. The few
that were left standing after that tended to live to a ripe old age.
(unless cholera or typhoid from contaminated water got them first)

UK is seeing a resurgence of measles mumps and rubella in the teenage
population of the worried well who were not immunised due to the last
big vaccine scare over MMR. This will be hardline Darwinism in action.
Kids who have no protection against these nasty childhood diseases are
at serious risk of lasting damage from infection. Certain regions herd
immunity has broken down and outbreaks are proving hard to control.

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly got TB and polio under
control until religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

The resurgence of disease is not due to lack of vaccines its due to poor
nutrition and actually due to the vaccines themselves according to this
link some resurgences of disease are actually mainly in the vaccinated
groups, however in the media they have largely blamed un-vaccinated
people for causing these outbreaks, but actually the outbreaks of
whooping cough was 81% in the vaccinated population (ironic!)

Here's the links:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/30/whooping-cough-vaccine.aspx

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/13/cid.cis287

Here's a story of a nurse who got fired for not taking the flu vaccine,
also the nurses union in BC defends nurses that don't want the vaccine
(many of them) based on scientific evidence that it is ineffective, but
still the government is planning to make it compulsory.

http://realfoodforager.com/how-i-lost-my-job-over-the-flu-vaccine-from-mindful-mama/

cheers,
Jamie


>

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:58:50 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 03:10:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:54:16 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 October 2013 10:30:09 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 18:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, 13 October 2013 02:33:56 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 05:16:27 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 12 October 2013 21:52:05 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Tell the truth.

I never do anything else.

Your claim is fatuous,

Scarcely. I could have written that I never post anything that I don't believe to be true, which has exactly the same information content.

It certainly does not, since the first case is unconditional and
states that you always tell the truth, while in the second you admit
that your belief that something is true might be flawed.

Since I'm the one that's deciding whether what I post is true, this is an academic distinction.

Ah, then, since later on in your post you admit that: "Of course I'm
aware that one's personal idiosyncrasies filter one's inputs.", you
should realize that that applies to you as well as to everyone else
and that your own idiosyncrasies may make you post what seems to you
to be true, but which - in reality - isn't.

Since I'd just said that I'm the one that decide whether what I post is true, your point is implicit in what I said, and - to any realistic observer - in what I originally posted.

Therefore, your statement that you never do anything but tell the
truth could be wrong.

I can certainly be wrong about it being true - as happens from time to time - but I can claim that I don't post anything that I don't believe to be true, which is all that is humanly possible to claim, and thus implicit in my original claim.

snipped the rest of the pretentious nonsense

---
Thrash around as much as you like, your original response was a lie
and, of course, you're trying to ameliorate its effect and save face
by saying, in effect, "Any rational being should have known what I
meant."

You're a cheat, Sloman, and the longer you post the tighter the noose
gets.

--
JF

 

[Greegor]

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly
got TB and polio under control until
religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

G > Those deaths were only because spooks got caught
G > actually using a vaccination team as a spy cover.

BS > Since the religious zealots were claiming that
BS > vaccinations were actually a cover for a plot
BS > to sterilise Muslims, as opposed to a cover
BS > for spying, this seems unlikely.

G > Blaming that onto religious zealots
G > or anti-vaccination people is wrong.

BS > Not an an impressively well-reasoned claim.

If you found out that foreign spooks
were involved with vaccines injected
into your bloodstream, you wouldn't
be alarmed, right Slow man?

 

[John Devereux]

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@gmail.com> writes:

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 02:15:09 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly
got TB and polio under control until
religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

Those deaths were only because spooks got caught
actually using a vaccination team as a spy cover.

Since the religious zealots were claiming that vaccinations were
actually a cover for a plot to sterilise Muslims, as opposed to a
cover for spying, this seems unlikely.

Blaming that onto religious zealots
or anti-vaccination people is wrong.

Not an an impressively well-reasoned claim.

Also their claimed justification does not falsify Martins point:

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly
got TB and polio under control until
religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

Vaccines are indeed efficient; 100% in the case of smallpox.


--

John Devereux

 

[Anssi Saari]

Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> writes:

I didn't phrase my posting well. I've found that Gentoo has ebuilds
for pretty much all the software I need to use.

I guess I have to agree with that. Android development stuff from Google
and Steam from Valve is just installable the same way as anything
else.

Maybe things in binary-distribution land have improved, but my recent
brief expeditions into Ubuntu and RH/CentOS territory haven't given
any indication that's the case.

Maybe you would like Sabayon instead in the binary-distribution land?
Gentoo based but software is prebuilt. Can still use emerge for stuff
that isn't.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 22:45:52 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

Vaccines have eliminated smallpox and nearly
got TB and polio under control until
religious zealots started killing the medical teams.

G > Those deaths were only because spooks got caught
G > actually using a vaccination team as a spy cover.

BS > Since the religious zealots were claiming that
BS > vaccinations were actually a cover for a plot
BS > to sterilise Muslims, as opposed to a cover
BS > for spying, this seems unlikely.

G > Blaming that onto religious zealots
G > or anti-vaccination people is wrong.

BS > Not an an impressively well-reasoned claim.

If you found out that foreign spooks
were involved with vaccines injected
into your bloodstream, you wouldn't
be alarmed, right Slow man?

Not unless Osama Bin Laden lived just around the corner. And the spies probably got better training in how to inject vaccines than the local health workers. They wouldn't want to blow their cover by making the people they injected sick.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Greegor]

G > If you found out that foreign spooks
G > were involved with vaccines injected
G > into your bloodstream, you wouldn't
G > be alarmed, right Slow man?

BS > Not unless Osama Bin Laden lived just
BS > around the corner. And the spies probably
BS > got better training in how to inject
BS > vaccines than the local health workers.
BS > They wouldn't want to blow their cover
BS > by making the people they injected sick.

You don't think the spooks would try to
sterilize a hostile population?

Are you really that ignorant of their
actual history, Slowman?

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 18 October 2013 14:03:57 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

G > If you found out that foreign spooks
G > were involved with vaccines injected
G > into your bloodstream, you wouldn't
G > be alarmed, right Slow man?

BS > Not unless Osama Bin Laden lived just
BS > around the corner. And the spies probably
BS > got better training in how to inject
BS > vaccines than the local health workers.
BS > They wouldn't want to blow their cover
BS > by making the people they injected sick.

You don't think the spooks would try to
sterilize a hostile population?

It seems unlikely. Something that created a more immediate effect would be more attractive.

Are you really that ignorant of their
actual history, Slowman?

I've yet to hear about any such exercise.

I imagine that Greegor may have some demented conspiracy theory in what passes for his mind, but who cares.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Greegor]

G > If you found out that foreign spooks
G > were involved with vaccines injected
G > into your bloodstream, you wouldn't
G > be alarmed, right Slow man?

BS > Not unless Osama Bin Laden lived just
BS > around the corner. And the spies probably
BS > got better training in how to inject
BS > vaccines than the local health workers.
BS > They wouldn't want to blow their cover
BS > by making the people they injected sick.

G > You don't think the spooks would try to
G > sterilize a hostile population?

BS > It seems unlikely. Something that
BS > created a more immediate effect
BS > would be more attractive.

G > Are you really that ignorant of their
G > actual history, Slowman?

BS > I've yet to hear about any such exercise.
BS >
BS > I imagine that Greegor may have some
BS > demented conspiracy theory in what
BS > passes for his mind, but who cares.

Attempt to cause dictators hair to fall out?
Exploding cigars?
Germ warfare on Chicago?
Tuskegee syphilis?

Hello?

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 18 October 2013 19:49:27 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:50:38 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, 17 October 2013 10:30:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:58:50 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman

snipped the rest of the pretentious nonsense

Typical Slomanesque response: When you can't counter, snip the
damaging bits and issue ad-hominem epithets.

That is a way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is to say that I get bored by tedious nonsense, and I imagine that everybody else does too.

<snipped the rest of the tedious nonsense>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 18 October 2013 17:49:24 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

<snipped Greegor being his usual demented self>

> Hello?

Goodbye.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 17:50:38 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, 17 October 2013 10:30:22 UTC+11, John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:58:50 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman

snipped the rest of the pretentious nonsense

---
Typical Slomanesque response: When you can't counter, snip the
damaging bits and issue ad-hominem epithets.
---

Thrash around as much as you like, your original response was a lie

Not true, but since you suffer from defective reading comprehension, you are not going to be able to work out why.

---
I proved it was a lie and - since you were left indefensible and
unable to refute the argument logically - you chose to reply with an
ad-hominem insult instead of with reasoned discourse.
---

and, of course, you're trying to ameliorate its effect and save face
by saying, in effect, "Any rational being should have known what I
meant."

Precisely. Though not *any* rational being, only those that can parse English sentences correctly.

---
Once again - true to form - you come through with irrelevant
ad-hominem bluster.
---

>And I'm not "thrashing about", just pointing out why your deluded claim is false.

---
You have neither pointed out with any degree of veracity that my
claims are deluded nor that they're false, all you've done is use a
scattergun approach to randomly fire epithets in the hope the shots
will momentarily take the focus away from the issue at hand and allow
you to slink away with your tail between your legs.
---

You're a cheat, Sloman, and the longer you post the tighter the noose
gets.

You're nitwit, Fields, and you haven't got enough sense to know when you are making it blindingly obvious.

---
Shouldn't you have written: "You're a nitwit,"...

--
JF

 

[Greegor]

JD > Yes, he thinks the CIA actually *is*
JD > engaged in a cunning plan to sterilise
JD > the muslims with vaccines.
JD > Time to back away slowly ... -- John Devereux

That's dishonest rhetoric.
I never said they actually did such a thing,
but they have a history of doing even more
outrageous things. If you were a citizen of
country X and found out that CIA agents
actually were involved with vaccines, you
would have good reason to be quite alarmed.

Do you think such national intelligence
services are of particularly moral character?

Maybe you can be a character reference
for KGB, Savokh, Mossadh as well as CIA?

Having any of those agencies actually
involved with vaccines is a bad idea.

 

[Greegor]

BS > You're nitwit, Fields, and you haven't [...]

JF > Shouldn't you have written: "You're a nitwit,"... -- JF

Careful!
Catching an Aspie at a spelling error could send them into a rage.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/01/03/Interactivity/Images/shooting-suspects.jpg

 

[John Devereux]

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 18 October 2013 17:49:24 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

snipped Greegor being his usual demented self

Hello?

Goodbye.

Yes, he thinks the CIA actually *is* engaged in a cunning plan to
sterilise the muslims with vaccines.

Time to back away slowly ...

--

John Devereux

 

On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:04:51 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<greegor47@gmail.com> wrote:

JD > Yes, he thinks the CIA actually *is*
JD > engaged in a cunning plan to sterilise
JD > the muslims with vaccines.
JD > Time to back away slowly ... -- John Devereux

That's dishonest rhetoric.

You expect otherwise from a lefty?

I never said they actually did such a thing,
but they have a history of doing even more
outrageous things. If you were a citizen of
country X and found out that CIA agents
actually were involved with vaccines, you
would have good reason to be quite alarmed.

I would be rather alarmed if X = USA.

Do you think such national intelligence
services are of particularly moral character?

Morality isn't even the issue. "What's in it for them?"

Maybe you can be a character reference
for KGB, Savokh, Mossadh as well as CIA?

Having any of those agencies actually
involved with vaccines is a bad idea.