Driver to drive?

[John S. Dyson]

In article <41684EFB.90505@nospam.com>,
Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> writes:

John S. Dyson wrote:

Making someone 'face their inner demons' is not the same thing as the
action associated with murdering another human being. It isn't uncommon
to show anger short-term, but the long term hatred as being continually
regenerated by the hate speech from ignorant people will cause both
persistent psychiatric problems and perhaps (in the worse case) even a
national emergency.

If that's your sincere belief then it is your *duty* as a citizen to
report your findings to the FBI, Secret Service, and Homeland Security.
Please do that right away.

Note that the various comments about murder are likely already being watched,

and no-one here needs to report it. Frankly, if I have noticed the
hate movement, it is probably true that the officials are already worried
about it. The damage done by the hate movement isn't as damaging to Bush
as it is to those who are addicted to hate.

More importantly, it is important to shun those organizations and people
who practice in hate speech. Perhaps the participants of hate speech
don't sometimes realize it -- probably due to limited human self-awareness.

John

 

[Winfield Hill]

John Fields wrote...

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004, toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote:

Almost everytime that I post something, Winfield Hill brings up
things like asshole or somesuch.

If it bothers you, then you should stop posting material which he
finds objectionable, since you would like everyone else to stop
posting in ways that you find objectionable. Lead by example.

Poor John S. Dyson, one almost feels sorry for him, persecuted as
he is. Ah, but then one reads Jonathan Kirwan's account yesterday
of Dyson's writings in this thread, and of my succinct answer,
"You can take your Hint and shove it up your ass..."

Jon's post was a real gem, well worth looking at once again.

====================================================================

From: Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com>
Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: Winfield Hill apparent 'ass' quote as an example
Message-ID: <h0lbm0h45gpka4ineg02o4525orouicqb3@4ax.com>
References: <LRY7d.104345$wV.45818@attbi_s54> <ck3cpq$okr$1@news.iquest.net>
<ck3d5e0ckh@drn.newsguy.com> <ck4is9$13fs$1@news.iquest.net>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:52:10 GMT

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:18:33 (UTC), toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote:

Thank you for showing a perfect example of the hatred that shows the
immature personality problem. Very good -- at least I hope that you
are just showing an example of the leftist hatred and mental illness
issue. .

Not at all. Win was responding to what amounted quite simply to bigoted
statements made about a whole class of people, indiscriminately. Since
that class included Win without really taking Win as a real person, he
was dead right to show some anger about it.

Dyson, you write such bigotry here all the while acting like the injured
party and saying that it is all the others who are so hateful. Worse
even, you don't say they __write__ hateful things, you say they __are__
hateful. Quite a different thing.

When Tom wrote to xray, this:

Strange, I thought you were in favor of John Kerry. Curious.

Win chipped in and wrote:

No doubt, like me, he's simply strongly against G. W. Bush.

Now Dyson, there is nothing at all hateful about Win's comment. Win
is perfectly entitled to be "strongly against" Bush. I am, in fact,
strongly against Bush's current administration (not him personally.)

Of course, it seems all you can see is __red__ in this, blinded as you
seem to be to really hearing a discussion on the issues and being able
to grant valid points where they exist (and they *do* exist on both
sides.)

So you said to Win:

Scary thing is that many people who are against GWB have apparently
let the hatred damage their sanity (or at least, their credibility
about being rational.)

And then (I'll save others a repeat of your pretentious posturing) you
go on about how __others__ hate and how "too bad" it is they do.

But what did Win say to garner this response from you? Just that he is
strongly opposed to Bush and that maybe someone else may be like-minded
in this.

What's so wrong with being strongly opposed to Bush that it should cause
you to go out and tar whole groups of people with the same "hatred and
insanity" brush you seem to wield at the drop of a hat?

There are adequate reasons for rational people to strongly oppose Bush
on real disagreements about policy, you know.

So what does Win do? Does he just let fly and insult you? No.
Instead, he quite rationally adds:

The scary thing is the way you so readily let fly with completely
unwarranted assumptions and self-righteous criticisms about other
people about which you know very little indeed. And your ready
labeling of nearly half the population of the US with extreme
derogatory terms and language. That's scary.

This isn't based on bigotry towards a class of people, Dyson. It's
based on what __you__ say and how you say it here. You __do__ (and
just had, in the posturing of your immediately prior post to Win) just
let fly with exactly what Win described. Google is filled with it,
so's my own private data set here. It's hardly some misguided
conjecture about you. It's easily demonstrated fact.

So, John Woodgate says this:

I wish they'd ALL stop slanging each other off. This personal abuse
is absolutely irrelevant to the issue of who should be the next Pres.

To which you just say it is really __you__ being the all-too-rational
one and add:

It is amazing that the mentally illness and unreasonable attitudes
are so clearly exposed by political discussion.

(Hint: it is okay to be for/against a candidate, but when hatred and
other kinds of semi-sanity start being exposed, then the Dems and
their supporters like Bloggs and Win start exposing their relative
amounts of (in)sanity. Frankly, psychiatrists who are starting their
practices should take a look at Dems posting on the various groups as
potential patient referrals.)

Finally, Win loses it and tells you to shove it where the sun don't shine.
You __earned__ that comment, Dyson.

Keep in mind that Win is NOT Fred or Rolavine or anyone else. And he
has every right to expect to be judged fairly for what __he__ says and
the way __he__ thinks about things. From what I've seen you write, all
I can gather is that you imagine that all who disagree with you about
the beneficial qualities of Bush's administration must be simply insane.
And you even imagine that's a rational position to take -- it's not, though.

Folks can legitimately disagree over Bush administration policy and where
the current administration is taking the U.S., without having to be
classified as insane, Dyson. You cannot seem to realize there are valid
differences in viewpoint over current U.S. policies and that rational
people who do not deserve your bigoted rants can reasonably choose
differently than you do.
Jon

P.S. You aren't the only one, but since you took the extra trouble to
chastise one of the more rational voices around, I've no problem
selecting you out.

===================

A nice piece of work there Jon, thanks for taking the time.


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)

 

[Robert Morein]

"Sylvan Morein DDS" <myson@auselesshuman.com> wrote in message
news:BD8E9967.7BFAD%myson@fe02.buzzardnews.com...

In article 41672785@news.mcleodusa.net, "Mark W. Lund, PhD"
mlund@powerstream.com> wrote:

Lithium-ion doesn't use lithium metal, but lithium compounds,
the energy density is much less and the boom turns out to be
a pop and a fire.

I notice you have a "Ph.D" appended to your name, Dr. Lund. Well you
should
know that my son Robert tried for 12 years to get this degree from Drexel,

Sorry, guys, forgery.

 

[Joel Kolstad]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4168203A.422A404@hotmail.com...

That's fine if you consider mp3 compression to be acceptable.

If you're unhappy with the fidelity of 128-384kbps MP3, you're in a league
where Bluetooth is not an appropriate solution. Nor is any other 'consumer'
wireless standard, IMO -- none of them are particularly concerned with
guaranteeing any particular bandwidth to any particular data stream.

I'd bet you that outside of an acoustically shielded listening room or
headphone 'environment,' (i.e., while engaged in any activity besides 'just
listening to music,' such as using a computer, jogging, mowing the lawn,
etc.) almost no one could tell the difference between 384kbps MP3 and a
wired connection.

---Joel

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <1ijgm0176bitonrevbnultph9qg1hfldh3@4ax.com>,
John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> writes:

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 20:14:15 +0000 (UTC), toor@iquest.net (John S.
Dyson) wrote:


Almost everytime that I post something, Winfield Hill brings up
things like asshole or somesuch.

---
If it bothers you, then you should stop posting material which he
finds objectionable, since you would like everyone else to stop
posting in ways that you find objectionable. Lead by example.
---

Without my attempt to open yours and Wilfreds' eyes, you'd keep on

your cycles of hate speech. My own issue against you is less your
political opinions (which I sometimes might agree and often disagree
with), but moreso the hate filled nonsense that makes an assumption
of truth. The hate has cyclically bootstrapped itself to be
intolerable, and I hope to have been successful to help you with hate
awareness.

---
So, don't tolerate it. Whine, scream, jump up and down and throw a
tantrum, whatever makes you feel better, sweetie...
---

Hopefully we have let you know how stupid the hate speech makes you

appear to be.

I know that emotional maturity is generally lacking in your political
discussions, so instead, I am helping you to understand by example.
The leftist assumptions and lack of emotional maturity won't be resolved,
but CERTAINLY your awareness of the associated damaging hatred will be
improved.

Perhaps eventually, the hate pollution of this newsgroup will be minimized.
Sadly, it is clear that being 'intelligent engineers' doesn't qualify
our leftist sages as being politically or emotionally competent.

John

 

[Nicholas O. Lindan]

"Frank Raffaeli" <SNIPrf_man_frTHIS@yahoo.com> wrote

Not much progress in RF since 1938 ... The RF industry has finally
come (up?) to the level of the pro-audio specialty devices:

http://www.j-walk.com/other/wifispray/

I endorse this product. John Kerry Heinz, "57 opinions"

 

[Mike Monett]

N. Thornton wrote:

[...]

Mike do you have any info on internal use? I still lack any info at
all on whether it does anything when drunk or injected.

Regards, NT

Yes, cs works on cuts, burns and scrapes, but the greatest benefit is
killing viral and bacterial infections. Many people drink 8 oz per day, but
this is usually only 5 or 10 ppm, which is fairly weak.

Higher concentrations, above 20 ppm, are much more effective on viruses
such as Herpes Zoster, the shingles virus, which is considered one of the
toughest to kill. The problem with high ppm is it may kill friendly
bacteria in the intestine and cause problems digesting. In this case, just
hold the cs in your mouth for 10 minutes where it will be absorbed
sublingually, then spit the rest out.

With high ppm cs, it is usually not necessary to take it every day, but 1
oz every three or four days may be all that is needed. Then, if you get a
slight sore throat indicating the start of an infection, just take a dose
and see if it goes away. If not, one more will usually kill it for good.

I know some people have talked about injecting cs into the bloodstream, but
I would not recommend it. There is no real need, and you run the risk of
introducing other pathogens. Also, when you absorb it through the mouth,
you give the metalloproteins in your saliva a chance to combine with the cs
so it can enter the bloodstream without combining with the salts and
forming silver chloride.

Mike Monett

References:

There are many cs references on the web, but most of them have serious
flaws. The electrolysis of silver in distilled water started with an
article by Mark Metcalf in 1996 using three 9V batteries, and he
recommended using salt to speed up the process. Unfortunately, this merely
converts the silver ions to silver chloride which is perhaps 3,000 times
less effective than the ions. The original procedure was later corrected.

Here is Mark Metcalf's original 1996 article in two parts:

"BANISHING DISEASE WITH THREE 9-VOLT BATTERIES - PART 1"

http://business.fortunecity.com/ellrd/490/banish1.html

"BANISHING DISEASE WITH THREE 9-VOLT BATTERIES - PART 2"

http://business.fortunecity.com/ellrd/490/banish2.html

NOTE: Mark's recommendation of using salt is no longer followed, as
discussed in Lindeman's article:

Peter A. Lindemann, "A Closer Look At Colloidal Silver"

http://www.elixa.com/silver/lindmn.htm

Zane Baranowski, "Colloidal Silver: The Natural Antibiotic"

http://www.elixa.com/silver/zaneuse.htm

Metalloproteins : "Biologic Transport of Silver Ions"

http://www.health2us.com/transport.htm

Cs groups:

There are two main cs groups on the web. Unfortunately, they are
usually dominated by commercial vendors, who give an interpretation of
colloidal silver that favors their own product. The best form of cs is
ionic and not particulate, or compounds such as mild protein.

The higher the ppm of ionic cs, the better. But it is difficult to go above
about 22 ppm.

Mike Devour's "Silver List"

http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html

Yahoo Colloidal Silver

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/colloidalsilver2/

Shingles and Colloidal Silver

Here is an article I wrote some time ago on the effect of colloidal silver
on the Shingles virus. (Caution - graphic photos.) Unfortunately, Yahoo
bought Geocities after I posted the article, and somehow my password broke
so I can no longer update it. There is a much better way of generating cs
than proposed in this article. Just reduce the current to 200 uA per square
inch or less, and increase the wetted area by folding the silver wire into
"U" or "W" shape.

http://www.geocities.com/mrmonett/shingles/0shin.htm

 

[Winfield Hill]

John S. Dyson wrote...

Hateful rants are all too common in this group.
Winfred (sic) seems to be ignore his own nonsense.

sic = spelling in copy. Makes no sense.


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <k5bgm0pm1bm8c93q1meu9ilamsptvk0o6h@4ax.com>,
Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On 09 Oct 2004 15:12:20 GMT, the renowned rolavine@aol.com (Rolavine)
wrote:

Dyson is off his meds again, someone get the straight jacket. When he is
helpless we can show him pictures of Clinton and watch him squirm.

You are a sadist. With clamps and eye drops as in _Clockwork Orange_ ?
But what music would you play? Dixie Chicks? k.d. lang?

I think, Rap would be more extreme.

"Welcome to your new home. For breafast we have Eggs Clinton or Fench
toast. Today's lunch special is Hillary hash and a garden salad.
Tonight's dinner menu will be Steak Ala Gore and for afters we have a nice
German chocolate cake. Today's movie selections will be Bowling for
Columbine and On The Waterfront. We hope you enjoy your stay."

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <ck9jc8$2hvl$17@news.iquest.net>,
John S. Dyson <toor@iquest.net> wrote:
[..]

genned up by the Democrat party. There have already been numbers
physical attacks orchestrated by the Democrat party,

I asssume the "numbers" in the above are "0" and "0.0" and "0.00" etc. As
for brown shirting, you only need to show up at a Bush event with a Kerry
sticker to be treatened with or actually arrested and dragged away.


--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <2sr191F1jmoohU2@uni-berlin.de>,
Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk@neopax.com> wrote:
[...]

Well, shooting presidents seems to be an American hobby.
I assume it's Leftists shooting Rightist Presidents?
Or am I wrong?

You are wrong. (Its a sport not a hobby.)


--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <2sr153F1jmoohU1@uni-berlin.de>,
Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk@neopax.com> wrote:
[...]

Well, I suppose it could come down to a tie again with Florida and Little Bro
counting hanging chads once again.
Halleluja! It's another divine miracle!

Thank Gawd those nice folks at Diebold have made sure there is no paper
record to cause such a dispute. The software security is insured by Sly
Fox inc.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Winfield Hill]

John S. Dyson wrote...

When seeing people like Wilfred who appears to be addicted to hate...

The mythical Wilfred may be addicted to hate, I wouldn't know, but as
for myself, I don't have a single hateful bone in my body. I don't
even hate John S. Dyson, although he strives mightily to achieve such
a lofty goal, calling me all sorts of mean lies, such as draft dodger.


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)

 

[Dirk Bruere at Neopax]

Ken Smith wrote:

In article <2sr191F1jmoohU2@uni-berlin.de>,
Dirk Bruere at Neopax <dirk@neopax.com> wrote:
[...]

Well, shooting presidents seems to be an American hobby.
I assume it's Leftists shooting Rightist Presidents?
Or am I wrong?


You are wrong. (Its a sport not a hobby.)

Or a game rather than sport.


--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On 9 Oct 2004 15:48:44 -0700, the renowned Winfield Hill
<Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote:

John S. Dyson wrote...

Hateful rants are all too common in this group.
Winfred (sic) seems to be ignore his own nonsense.

sic = spelling in copy. Makes no sense.

Actually, it's apparently from Latin sic: "thus, so, in that manner".

But I think he meant this:

sic

VARIANT FORMS: also sick

TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: sicced also sicked, sicˇcing,
sickˇing, sics, sicks

1. To set upon; attack.

2. To urge or incite to hostile action; set: sicced the dogs on the
intruders.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Ken Smith]

Attrib removed because I can't figure it out.

Now Dyson, there is nothing at all hateful about Win's comment. Win
is perfectly entitled to be "strongly against" Bush. I am, in fact,
strongly against Bush's current administration (not him personally.)

Many people see Bush as a classic "Post Turtle". A "Post Turtle" is a
western expression. It comes from the fact that, when riding the range,
once in a while you will come opon a turtle on top of a fence post. Any
reasonable person would know that the poor thing is trapped there and that
it didn't get there all by itself. Most cowboys are kind hearted folks
who will stop and help the poor little critter down from its high post
before it hurts itself.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <OrW9d.1404$6q2.603@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
Joerg <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
[...]

be well above the hearing range of animals. I don't know but maybe bats
are the ones with the highest "spectrum allocation". Then there is IR

I think bats go up to something like 100KHz. The bug catching bats need
high frequencies to get good locations. The flying fox doens't need
anywhere near as good of accuracy.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <416848D1.10402@nospam.com>, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
[...]

billions of dollars down the drain, and to think the warhead will be
delivered in one of those 96% of millions of ship containers entering
the country without inspection.

Fed-X when your nuke absolutely must be there over night.

Don't count out the oil tankers and other bulk carriers either. A nuke
burried in oar is still a nuke.

--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Mike Monett]

N. Thornton wrote:

[...]

Mike do you have any info on internal use? I still lack any info at
all on whether it does anything when drunk or injected.

Regards, NT

A further answer to your question - I just came across this entry by
Mike Devour, owner of The Silver List. He has been taking cs since
April, 1997, and recently answered a question about dosage, which I
post below. Note he is pretty casual about the amount and frequency
of the dosage, and most oldimers follow similar procedures. You let
your body tell you when you need to take it, and how much.

His statement about not needing antibiotics since he started are
echoed by just about everyone who takes cs. You simply don't get
sick if you take it fairly regularly. If you do get lax in taking it
and catch a bug, you get rid of it very quickly with a dose or two.

There is no down time for a flu, no time wasted in a doctor's
waiting room sharing all the bugs with everyone else, and no more
expensive prescription antibiotics that have zero effect on viruses,
but make you sick anyway by killing your digestion.

Note that his cs generator uses a plain silver coin. The sharp edges
limit his maximum concentration to perhaps 10 ppm or so, but his
brew is uncontrolled so he may get anywhere from 2 or 3 ppm or so.

The point is it doesn't take very much cs if you are young and have
a healthy immune system. As you age, your immune system starts
degrading. Then you may need stronger concentration, up to a max of
22 ppm or so. This requires a bit more care.

Here's Mike's post:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

CS>How much CS I take...
From: M. G. Devour
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:16:01

http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m73475.html

Susie wants to know:

What kind of dosages do individual people take and why and what
has it helped?

Okay, I'll get the ball rolling:

I make CS using low voltage DC with a current control diode in the
line. My main electrode is a 1 oz silver bullion coin. So I have a
pretty low current density, which probably results in a largely
ionic CS, as well as particles of reasonably small size. There's a
weak Tyndall effect that's only visible in a darkened room.

I have no clue what the ppm is.

If nothing in particular is going on, I'll take a swallow or two a
week, whenever I think about it. No, I can't get any more precise
than that unless you want me to take a swallow and spit it out
into a measuring cup... <sheesh!!>

<grin>

If I think I'm at risk of some kind of plague, I'll up that to a
swallow or two per day until I lose interest and fall back to my
normal habit. If I seem to be *getting* such a plague, I'll take
several swallows a day, whenever I think about it, until the
danger seems to be past.

By "take a swallow" I mean pouring a few "glugs" (uncalibrated)
into my upturned mouth (so as not to contaminate the bottle of CS
with my saliva), then swishing it around as long as I can, which
is usually limited by my rather short attention span,
forgetfulness, or the need to verbally reprimand my daughter for
whacking her brother with the end of a broom handle...

Ahem! What was I saying?

This may mean anywhere from a few seconds to several minutes. It
is not readily quantified.

What has it helped? Well, my first efforts with CS yielded a
period of 3 1/2 years in which I didn't get so much as a cold.
That was after at least a decade of recurrent bronchitis and strep
infections and multiple courses of antibiotics each year.

Of course I did eventually catch a respiratory plague of some sort
after having gotten slack in taking it. Since then I have only
rarely gotten ill, and always during those slack times I've not
been using much CS.

One thing for sure is that I have not needed a single antibiotic
in the 7 or so years I've been taking CS. In fact, no one else in
my family has, either.

[...]

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Be well,

Mike Monett

 

[Winfield Hill]

John S. Dyson wrote...

kensmith@green.rahul.net writes:

Thank Gawd those nice folks at Diebold have made sure there is no paper
record to cause such a dispute. The software security is insured by Sly
Fox inc.

IMO, many of the electronic voting schemes seem incredibly outrageously
implemented. Even though it isn't important to distinguish, there is
definitely some kind of incompetency or insanity involved in the so-called
'upgrades.'

How could a sane specification for a voting scheme in the current climate,
with current technological ignorance of technology in politics/law/policing
and the general public, for a voting scheme practically avoid a physical
paper trail? Of course, it is THEORETICALLY and eventually completely
possible to define and develop a foolproof all-electronic scheme, it is
also almost impossible to make the foolproof scheme totally secure TODAY.
There is just too much technical ignorance in the legal, political and even
in the technical fields. Even if the effects of the mass ignorance are all
resolved, then the dishonesty and lack of integrity of "modern humanity"
would render almost any scheme untrustworthy.

I agree 1000%.


--
Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dotties-org for now)