OT: Bush Thugs Rough Up Grieving Mother of KIA

[xray]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:38:17 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"
<salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

If god appears and produces a sun before me, I might reconsider my
decision,

If that happens you will either be vaporized out of any further
consciousness, or you will enter a new dimension that you don't seem to
believe in.

Or did you mean son?

 

[Rolavine]

From: soar2morrow@yahoo.com (Tom Seim)
snip

As usual, you don't know shit:

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/updates/sep04/iraq_fs49_091604.pdf

Interesting link, thanks.

If you are using this link to show that Iraq's water and electrical systems are
in better shape now than before the invasion it doesn't. However, it does make
it sound like sewer systems at least in Baghdad may be better.

The people in charge of getting rebuilding projects going in Iraq are failing.
Just last week it was all over the news that they only managed to spend about
8% of the 18 billion allocated to rebuilding. It also seems that the admin has
put inexperienced young relatives of prominent Republicans into adminstrative
positions in Iraq. Since this money should directly employ people it would have
prob. cut down on the number of insurgents. The real unemployment in Iraq is
said to be about 50%. It is time to get Iraq moving again, we can't keep them
on our welfare rolls forever. It is time for this admin to kick some ass and
put some people into rebuilding Iraq that know what the hell they are doing.
Employed people are less likely to become terrorists, hopeless people are more
likely to become terrorists (however, most Iraqi insurgents think of themselves
as freedom fighters).

Rocky

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <82q4d.5590$Co1.3175@trnddc02&gt about 'Ping Kevin Aylward - re
your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

And Kevin went ballistic, because his "I'm under attack" meme got
triggered, and he went into defensive mode.

I did my best to warn you that that would happen.

If you look at some of Kevin's papers other than the front page, you
will find quite long passages with only trivial errors, such as
misplaced commas.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Guy Macon <http@?.guymacon.com>
wrote (in <10l4hjs45fl9tae@news.supernews.com&gt about 'Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Wed, 22 Sep 2004:

Rich Grise <null@example.net> says...

...has never been under attack, except maybe by Guy Macon, which is
kind of like being attacked by Snuggles(tm), no offense, Guy.

You are the wind beneath my wings.


I thought Snuggles was the three-headed dog in 'Harry Potter'.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wednesday 22 September 2004 12:04 am, Ban did deign to grace us with the
following:

Rich Grise wrote:

Oh, blush. I'm available next week - whatcha got? (I can do almost
anything, albeit only a few things in any real depth. I like to sit
on my butt a lot, so I'd rather design crap than stand at a machine
making it. I ain't that hungry yet!)


Rich, you certainly would be better off if Thompson had recommended you.
It sounds your buddy is himself unimployed. :-(
Maybe you guys could meet and roll a few joints together, that guy Guy
seems a bit tough and would need a decent puff. (Puff, the Magic Dragon
=remember "Meet the parents"))
--
"Meet the Parents"????? Try Peter, Paul, and Mary. Or maybe they only

covered it, in which case I apologize to the author and eagerly await
the correction(s).

And I don't know Guy's opinion of pot or pot smoking, or pot smokers,
for that matter, so I'm going to let that part slide unless there seems
to be some pressing need to ask. For my part, I'll smoke with anybody,
except anybody who would bust me, of course. If you ask if they're a
cop, they have to tell you, don't they?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Charles Elliot]

In article <2rerfbF19et4sU1@uni-berlin.de>,
dated Thu, 23 Sep 2004 03:41:47 +0100,
Dirk Bruere at Neopax, <dirk@neopax.com> says...

Well now...
I get netcopped for calling people who download exe files from
Usenet suckers.

The download was not from Usenet, but from a well known website.

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wednesday 22 September 2004 05:01 am, Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com>
did deign to grace us with the following:

John Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> says...

Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote:

You are, after all, driving your own bus.

Trams, trolleys and cable cars need drivers, but they can't decide to
turn left or right. (;-)

Excellent analogy. The Trolly driver can choose speed but not
direction. The Cable Car driver has only a binary control over
speed; go the speed of the cable or release and stop. The bus
driver can control speed and yaw, but not pitch or roll. IOW,
Free will does not imply freedom fro all constraints.

Guy, you sound like "The Reflexive Universe" is right up your
alley. Photons have three degrees of freedom, protons and
electrons have only the two (each), atoms have only one,
and molecules have no degrees of freedom at all.

Then, motivated by Consciousness - which the photon was
in the first place - the molecules start getting together,
to form living things - plants, that have one degree of
freedom (and radial symmetry), animals, that have two
(and bilateral symmetry), and Humans have three.

Something like that - it's a really inadequate nutshell, but you
can read about the book - and the cult it's inspired - at some of
these links:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22The+reflexive+universe%22&btnG=Search

He's trying to reconcile mysticism and QM under the umbrella
of cosmology, or possibly cosmogony, albeit I don't know what
that means. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Don Pearce]

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 06:33:02 +0100, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Don Pearce <donald@pearce.uk.com
wrote (in <4151f5be.57060937@news.plus.net&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Wed, 22 Sep 2004:

So much for axiom-based theories, then. You and Kevin have just rendered
the whole lot invalid at a stroke. I'm convinced - anyone else?

You have just trashed Euclid and a legion of other stuff.

There is no such thing as an axiom-based theory, using the word 'theory'
in its correct scientific sense. I explained all this in this thread
about 2000 posts ago.

Conjecture -> TEST -> hypothesis -> TESTS -> theory -> further TESTS.

It doesn't seem possible to test Kevin's proposals, so they can't be a
theory.

This is how Kevin works.

1. Think of a conclusion, based on your personal prejudice.
2. Build a set of logical steps to reach that conclusion.
3. Write an axiom as a basis for those logical steps.

Does *nothing* strike you as just a teeny bit unscientific about this
process? Have you ever seen anybody build a house starting with the
attic?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rolavine <rolavine@aol.com> wrote
(in <20040923015012.08200.00001059@mb-m06.aol.com&gt about '[OT]: The
not-so-democratic Democrats', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

The people in charge of getting rebuilding projects going in Iraq are
failing.

Since the locals tend to behead them, that's hardly surprising.

Just last week it was all over the news that they only managed
to spend about 8% of the 18 billion allocated to rebuilding.

They are having to spend a large slice of the remaining 92% on security
measures.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <OTt4d.5644$Co1.2225@trnddc02&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

Then, motivated by Consciousness - which the photon was in the first
place - the molecules start getting together, to form living things -
plants, that have one degree of freedom (and radial symmetry), animals,
that have two (and bilateral symmetry), and Humans have three.

You cannot be serious! Or is that a set of axioms? (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 19:44:34 -0700, the renowned John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

I'd never violate Ohm's Law, or resist arrest.

But I am disappointed that nobody riffed on my "monkey" post, though.

John

It was so close, but we were all put off a bit by the whole monkey-ape
dichotomy, I'm afraid.

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

 

[Rich Grise]

On Monday 20 September 2004 08:36 pm, Don Taylor did deign to grace us with
the following:

I'd be up for the experiment, just to see if I'm right or wrong.

Do you mean as the patient? Would you like to try something a little
less intrusive, if a little silly-sounding at first?

When you get an "attack" of your noise, listen to it, as if it's
a radio station that's almost swamped in static (or whatever it
sounds like to you) and see if you can imagine it as some form
of communication, maybe hyperspace radio from aliens, or something;
listen with an attitude maybe something like, "Well, the guy's taking a
flight of fancy, but what's wrong with playing pretend just this once,
just so I can tell him he's wrong." And actually try to "actively
listen," as I said, like you're trying to pick a single conversation
out of a crowd, or whatever way you feel like "listening" to
your tinnitus.

Every now and then I get a mild ringing in my ears, as I suppose
almost everybody does from time to time, and I've tried that
listen-to-it trick, and it makes it go away.

Let me know what happens, OK?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Monday 20 September 2004 03:05 am, John Woodgate did deign to grace us
with the following:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net
wrote (in <kdt3d.4086$PZ4.189@trnddc06&gt about 'SUPER-DUPER OFF TOPIC -
GOD ANSWERS RICH GRISE'S EMAIL', on Mon, 20 Sep 2004:

So, no wonder I'm a wacko!

Go back and tell him that he writes a load of tripe and see if he'll
plonk you. (;-)
--

I don't know if this is irony, or if there's some other "category"
or "genre" but, if one were to ask that "seriously," I'd be inclined
to say, "Oh, I don't think he plonks anybody." ;-)

Some people seem to have plonked him, however. ;-)

And, well, given the fact that there are many loads of tripe available
all over the place, it's a good thing that there are stable-minded
thinkers like yourself to hold the matrix in place for us crazies
to play in.

When we build those dream castles, we've still gotta find somebody
to help build the staircase. And bring provisions. ;-)

Thanks!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wednesday 22 September 2004 11:46 am, Ken Smith did deign to grace us
with the following:

In article <20040922135642.04433.00001196@mb-m05.aol.com>,
Rolavine <rolavine@aol.com> wrote:
[...]
Are you sure it would destroy the floppies, I dont' think so, I think it
just looks at them to check that you own them.

Windows95 demanded that the DOS floppy not be write protected and trashed
it so the DOS on it won't ever install again. I assume that ME would do
the same to the Win98 floppies and am not about to switch off the write
protect to find out.

Where exactly did you get this little tidbit?

It's about the silliest thing I've heard yet.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Don Pearce <donald@pearce.uk.com>
wrote (in <41526f20.88130921@news.plus.net&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

This is how Kevin works.

1. Think of a conclusion, based on your personal prejudice.

That addition trashes your position; YOU are prejudiced.

2. Build a set of logical steps to reach that conclusion.
3. Write an axiom as a basis for those logical steps.

Does *nothing* strike you as just a teeny bit unscientific about this
process? Have you ever seen anybody build a house starting with the
attic?

If you delete the 'prejudice', yes, that is how science sometimes makes
advances. Steps 2 and 3 may be reversed. Of course, scientists are only
human, so there may be some prejudice in there. But if it is misplaced,
the outcome will be failure.

You can apply the process to SR, but I'm not saying that this is how it
happened:

1. Einstein concludes that there are problems with Newtonian mechanics
(a conclusion that many contemporaries would label as heretical;
prejudice again).

2. Einstein adopts an axiom that the speed of light in vacuo is
invariant with respect to the uniform motion of an observer.

3. Einstein builds a set of logical steps from that to testable
predictions, that have been tested and confirmed. That elevates SR from
a hypothesis to a theory.

Now look at Kevin's stuff:

1. He concludes that the treatment of genes and memes by well-known
authors is incomplete, and in some aspects incorrect.

2. He adopts a set of axioms, of which the most controversial, perhaps,
is stated, too figuratively IMHO, as 'There is no magic'.

3. From those axioms, he draws some conclusions, of which the most
controversial seems to be 'There is no such thing as free will.'

Unlike SR, though, there is no way, AFAICS, of testing that, so no
theory can result.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <yfu4d.5649$Co1.4812@trnddc02&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

So, if you choose to
believe that you don't, then it will have already been proved to your
own satisfaction that you don't, and the rest is conversation.

It's conservation as well; Occam's Razor.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that xray <notreally@hotmail.invalid>
wrote (in <oqo4l01n0f279bf5901lc9dsu6j21ahk89@4ax.com&gt about '[OT]:
Ping Kevin Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:38:17 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

If god appears and produces a sun before me, I might reconsider my
decision,

If that happens you will either be vaporized out of any further
consciousness, or you will enter a new dimension that you don't seem to
believe in.

Or did you mean son?

San, sen, sin, son or sun; it doesn't matter. Appearing and producing

ANYTHING is both necessary and sufficient. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <HZt4d.5647$Co1.4440@trnddc02&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

You Are One With
Nirvana.

No, he's One Without Nirvana.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <zvt4d.5637$Co1.5334@trnddc02&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

That's what I wanna do.

I'm tempted to ask, 'You want to be an insurance company?' but, since
you are in the US, you wouldn't understand the allusion.

Note, that's 'allusion', not 'elusion' or 'illusion'.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Rich Grise <null@example.net>
wrote (in <7Bt4d.5638$Co1.4119@trnddc02&gt about '[OT]: Ping Kevin
Aylward - re your "scientific paper"', on Thu, 23 Sep 2004:

If you ask if they're a
cop, they have to tell you, don't they?

Not necessarily. Google for 'mental reservation' or 'Jesuit +lying'.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk