|
|
| Author |
Message |
Math Freak
science forum beginner
Joined: 11 Jul 2005
Posts: 43
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 15, 2006 10:20 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
On Sat, 15 Jul 06 09:46:45 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
| Quote: | In article <6qgzl041mrrt.17ipig70yv5ge$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Math Freak <MathFreak@FakeAddress.com> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 06 12:13:28 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
Iranians doing "viscious acts" against other humans?
Yes. The intention has been announced.
Giving a rapist a good lesson is hardly viscious.
You are still following your usual posting pattern. By the
third post, you start to try to intimidate me with sexual
abuse. You still have not learned that this doesn't work.
|
"Rapist" is a good analogy for an Israeli individual.
If you have problem with this, it's not my doing.
| Quote: |
And look who's talking.
In addition, your assumptions are wrong. The religion I was
raised in did not exist 2500 years ago.
Oh yes it did, it was called tribalism. Plus, a rapist
may also have a religion but who cares. He's a rapist
first. You're a pro-Israeli first. I mentioned Purim to
show how backward, thugs at best, those people have
been and for how long at that.
Ah, you have to blame some random people who lived
thousands of years ago for your shortcoming. That
will not fix anything.
Your pro-Israeliness is not fixable honey, and your
pro-Israeliness was the subject,
No, it wasn't. It is you who keeps bringing this one
up.
|
It's because that's what has always been in your way to
get to become a better person. Really! Nobody is joking
here.
| Quote: | not my "shortcomings".
Life offered thousands of ways to a specimen like you
to prevent yourself from becoming one and ... . Grow
up.
I am grown up. You and your ilk keep telling me
that you intend to murder me and mine and destroy our
way of living. Any talk or action to defend myself is
belitteled as being immature and, for some bizarre reason,
pro-Israeli. Your thinking is illogical and has absolutely
no basis in reality.
|
That's because you don't trust me. I am not telling you
lies. You're a pro-Israeli, and thus conducting a foul
irresponsible sinful life in the eyes of every decent
person in the world. Your problems are your own
creations! Go Islam.
--
"behar kojA ke ravi AsemAn hamin rang ast." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:45 am Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <Scvtg.29$45.1693@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
| Quote: | In article <e95899$8qk_001@s778.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <9ydtg.23$45.1420@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e92kro$8qk_001@s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <ahQsg.13$45.1124@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e901i0$8qk_001@s891.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <THxsg.6$45.657@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e8t5j5$8qk_001@s767.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <rDcsg.1$45.69@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
wrote:
In article <e8qpgk$8qk_001@s878.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <44ae9318$1@news101.his.com>,
FearlessFerret <ff@repliestonewsgrouponly.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
It is apparently heretical in this religion
to identify bullshit for what it is.
I think you will find this is a necessary component of any
religion. At least, any that include the concept of heresy.
Usually in the beginnings. After the religion has evolved
there comes a time when it learns how to exist with other
religions in the Western world. In the ancient world
there didn't seem to be much dispute about whose god was
bigger.
Well, the source of trouble is momotheism. Polytheistic religions
are, by nature, far more relaxed.
The religions that are giving the world the most
problems are based on the political leader also being the
religious head, thus the god.
Oh, in many ancient systems the political leader was also a god.
Note, though, "a god", not "the god". "The god" is a monotheistic
concept.
Right. I'm grateful for the correction. It should have been
written as "a god". I've been reading about North Korea and
it's politics and economies, etc.; I think the books were
dumped by a poli. sci. grad. Their political head had
established a religion. I think I've read that Khaddaffi(sp?)
has also established his own brand. And I think Nassar did a
similar thing. Of course, all the various popes did it.
Well, to be exact, they established themselves as God's emissarries,
but this is not a significant difference, in the present context. And
the kings ruled "in God's grace", of course.
Yes. I'm trying to think in practical terms as in how stuff
really gets done rather than the indirect addressing of
responsibility...and credit.
Well, the indirect addressing is valuable, as it affords nearly full
authority, yet escapes full responsibility.
Sure. I didn't intend to imply that it wasn't important; but
that's for the marketing people. I'm trying to figure what
people do to keep things working.
But, I agree, that's a technicality.
It's something that has to be included in the design spec but
will be useless unless the cold start has been thrashed out.
I'm still trying to define cold start essentially.
Not sure you can define a clear cold start here.
I'm not either  . It's my way of trying to identify key
elements.
We're talking about systems that evolved over long time.
Sure they evolved over a long time but disinegrated within
50 years. (I'm think specifically of the Roman Empire now.)
The thing to use as a measuring stick is trade. When
trade disintegrates from empire-wide to only locally with
neighbors, it is the end of that political, economic, and
cultural era. I'm trying to figure out how to define
a cold start; IOW, what is the list of requirements needed
to begin the next evolution of cooperative trade? Booty
is non-productive for the long-term. It's a nice carrot
but is only concerned with used stuff. It doesn't nothing,
and seems to be counterproductive, to prosperous economy.
Again, hard to say because there doesn't appear to be a clearly
defined cold start. And, that's going of on a tangent to the previous
issue.
|
This is my usual style of trying to take a complex system apart
for the purpose of identifying the key components in order
to get something to work a little bit.
As for the tangent, I do get sidetracked easily these days.
<snip>
| Quote: | More than 5%. Would it be as high 75%? I would think anybody
who had property would have a say, especially the women who
were running the farms.
I would say that yes, that was pretty much the demarcation line,
possession of property. And in economy like, say, New England's of
the 18th century, with little room for laborers and hired hands, we
may be talking about 50% of the population at least.
|
IIRC, one of the ways of training new people was through
the indentured servant process. Ben Franklin was indentured
to a printer and learned that trade. People bought their
way to America via years of promised labor. So these people
would also be talking and working when these conversations were
occuring. I also think another aspect of this is that promigenture
was eliminated. Everybody had to had to work to get their own.
Being aware of how the politics were straying was important to
making it possible to acquire property and making it possible
to keep it no matter who was ruling.
| Quote: |
The above observation also contradicts the general assumption that
an "educated" populace is needed for a democracy.
That depends on ...
This one has led me down a path of trying to define educated now.
Ahh, you're getting there now.
If you look at the list of the Framers of the Constitution, you find
quite a few who had no more than high school education. Granted, most
had some college, but rarely above a BA level. Yet, in their writings
you see clarity of mind and comprehension of reality which you'll
rarely find among best educated academics of today.
I had assumed that most of their training was done at home doing
real work.
That was big part, for sure.
I haven't found out how they learned about European histories and
stuff.
Books, books, books.
For some strange reason, I keep assuming
that books were very rare and not available to non-monied people.
I don't know where I keep getting this from.
You're confusing time frames, I think. Books ware rare and expensive
in the middle ages, when they very being copied by hand. But the time
frame you're talking about is more than 3 centuries after the
invention of the printing press. At this point prices were low enough
for common people being able to afford them. Heck, they already had
newspapers at that time, that tells you a lot about the cost of print.
|
I haven't overlooked newspapers nor the fact that printing was
a common business. I think I was leaping from the bit of knowledge
that Ben Franklin started the notion of public libraries. Before
then libraries were private. Hence, if they were private, only
the owners had access to those books. Other than the Bible,
I assumed that people who have not yet acquired property would
not have an extensive library available to them.
| Quote: |
It cannot have the meaning the ivy-stuffed heads say it is.
Indeed. Their meaning is along the "mutual adoration society" lines.
ah, thank you. A much better description.
I ran across a person who had a major in science but dismissed coal
miners as unskilled workers. Where did this kind of attitude start?
And is it new?
It is new, and it isn't. Disdain towards people with dirt under their
fingernails goes all the way back to antiquity (and goes a long way
towards explaining the tendency of Greek scientists to prefer
theoretical discourse over experiments). What is new, dating to more
or less the second half of the 19th century, is the emergence of the
"intelligentsia" as a social class, with pretensions of superiority.
reading through various books of the period you see as recurring theme
the pretensions of the intelligentsia to be the modern day
aristocracy.
Yes. I have one of those. It was written by a Polish woman
who told about one of the German invasions around the turn
of the century. From her POV, her servants couldn't cope without
her guidance, but this made no sense.
Makes perfect sense, that's the intelligentsia's justification for
their claim to supremacy, "these commoners, they're like children,
without us they'll be lost".
|
I beleive that is a direct quote. :-)
In Massachusetts and female? Are you kidding?!
| Quote: |
There was other strange
attitudes. There was almost a hatred of grocers who did manage
to get food for resale in the citified areas. There was no
appreciation for the grocers' accomplishments despite the laws
that made the actions fatal if caught.
Yes, for a member of the intelligentsia seeing "uncultured people"
succeed where the "refined" ones fail was a mortal insult.
|
I'm currently having a fight right now where somebody is insisting
that I could afford to waste money that I didn't have. This
is that cognitive dissonance again..isn't it?
| Quote: | However, although all the pretensiousness of aristocracy
was there, the other attributes of aristocracy, namely wealth and
power, didn't quite materialize. In order to compensate, the
intelligentsia developed an intense disdain towards anything practical
as being lowely and undignified.
All this is a gross overgeneralization,
Yes, I understand.
of course, with cheap amateur
psychology to boot. Take if for what it is worth.
It may be cheap psych but I am finding a strong correlation
with this kind of thought process and a 100% divorce from
reality. Take our crop of Democrats...One of them stood in
the middle of rubble of tunnel that fell apart, and declared
out loud, "The tunnels are safe." Hello?[ emoticon knocking
on wooden head] Where did you say you dropped your brains
off for dry cleaning? I am encountering instances of abject
stupidity almost weekly now. The rate has increased.
Maybe. The question that comes to mind is formulated in one of Greg's
sigs, "are the idiots getting dumber or only lauder?"
|
Neither. It has become mandatory to be stupid. There have been
laws passed to make sure our brightest are either drugged or
hog-tied as kids. It is considered to be admirable to break laws
that deal with cooperation.
<snip>
| Quote: | A stable human society is made of a stew of followers,
spiced with a dash of leaders. With too many bright, independent
minded and critical individuals societies lose stability.
These are the anarchists; I seem to be tripping over this
attitude, right and left, over the past year.
Aha. Now, imagine what would happen if those would constitute, say,
10% of the society.
I don't have to imagine; I think I'm seeing 50% of society on
the east coast.
Consider ancient Greece.
I have no information to do this. I'll have to watch out
for a book on this one. Didn't Greece have a common culture
rather than a common politics that unified it such that we,
wearing hindsight glasses, can clump it as a civilization?
Oh, it sure had a common culture and it sure qualifies as a
civilization. However, as society and political entity they were
hopelessly fragmented, thus they expendended most of their energies on
internal fighting, failing to become the great power they could've be
otherwise.
Right. The US avoided this by writing the Constitution and
getting everybody to agree to work within those rules.
Nice, but insufficient. Look how many other countries wrote
constitutions, since then, with no much effect. Heck, look how many
countries are on their third or fourth constitution. It is not a god
given law that whoever agreed to some rules today, will still agree
tomorrow. And given a sufficiently quarrelsome population, the above
is unlikely to happen.
|
The states weren't agreeable at all. There were border fights.
The territories were always fighting until enough coalesced into
deciding they needed to cooperate enough to be a state and member
of the union. Then the Civil War had to happen to settle the
transitions into the industrial revolution. There are still
states fighting over border definitions. The difference is
that they hire lawyers instead of soldiers and use weapons of
words rather than bullets.
I think the reaons the US' worked is because everybody who
did come to the US had a high intolerance level of being
told what to do with themselves. We're still allergic
to that.
<snip> sorry. this is getting too big.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
science forum Guru
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 434
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <e9d8ta$8qk_001@s850.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
| Quote: | In article <Scvtg.29$45.1693@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e95899$8qk_001@s778.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <9ydtg.23$45.1420@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e92kro$8qk_001@s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <ahQsg.13$45.1124@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e901i0$8qk_001@s891.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <THxsg.6$45.657@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e8t5j5$8qk_001@s767.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <rDcsg.1$45.69@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
wrote:
In article <e8qpgk$8qk_001@s878.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <44ae9318$1@news101.his.com>,
FearlessFerret <ff@repliestonewsgrouponly.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
It is apparently heretical in this religion
to identify bullshit for what it is.
I think you will find this is a necessary component of any
religion. At least, any that include the concept of heresy.
Usually in the beginnings. After the religion has evolved
there comes a time when it learns how to exist with other
religions in the Western world. In the ancient world
there didn't seem to be much dispute about whose god was
bigger.
Well, the source of trouble is momotheism. Polytheistic religions
are, by nature, far more relaxed.
The religions that are giving the world the most
problems are based on the political leader also being the
religious head, thus the god.
Oh, in many ancient systems the political leader was also a god.
Note, though, "a god", not "the god". "The god" is a monotheistic
concept.
Right. I'm grateful for the correction. It should have been
written as "a god". I've been reading about North Korea and
it's politics and economies, etc.; I think the books were
dumped by a poli. sci. grad. Their political head had
established a religion. I think I've read that Khaddaffi(sp?)
has also established his own brand. And I think Nassar did a
similar thing. Of course, all the various popes did it.
Well, to be exact, they established themselves as God's emissarries,
but this is not a significant difference, in the present context. And
the kings ruled "in God's grace", of course.
Yes. I'm trying to think in practical terms as in how stuff
really gets done rather than the indirect addressing of
responsibility...and credit.
Well, the indirect addressing is valuable, as it affords nearly full
authority, yet escapes full responsibility.
Sure. I didn't intend to imply that it wasn't important; but
that's for the marketing people. I'm trying to figure what
people do to keep things working.
But, I agree, that's a technicality.
It's something that has to be included in the design spec but
will be useless unless the cold start has been thrashed out.
I'm still trying to define cold start essentially.
Not sure you can define a clear cold start here.
I'm not either . It's my way of trying to identify key
elements.
We're talking about systems that evolved over long time.
Sure they evolved over a long time but disinegrated within
50 years. (I'm think specifically of the Roman Empire now.)
The thing to use as a measuring stick is trade. When
trade disintegrates from empire-wide to only locally with
neighbors, it is the end of that political, economic, and
cultural era. I'm trying to figure out how to define
a cold start; IOW, what is the list of requirements needed
to begin the next evolution of cooperative trade? Booty
is non-productive for the long-term. It's a nice carrot
but is only concerned with used stuff. It doesn't nothing,
and seems to be counterproductive, to prosperous economy.
Again, hard to say because there doesn't appear to be a clearly
defined cold start. And, that's going of on a tangent to the previous
issue.
This is my usual style of trying to take a complex system apart
for the purpose of identifying the key components in order
to get something to work a little bit.
As for the tangent, I do get sidetracked easily these days.
snip
|
So do I, only this topic is growing too big already.
| Quote: |
More than 5%. Would it be as high 75%? I would think anybody
who had property would have a say, especially the women who
were running the farms.
I would say that yes, that was pretty much the demarcation line,
possession of property. And in economy like, say, New England's of
the 18th century, with little room for laborers and hired hands, we
may be talking about 50% of the population at least.
IIRC, one of the ways of training new people was through
the indentured servant process. Ben Franklin was indentured
to a printer and learned that trade. People bought their
way to America via years of promised labor. So these people
would also be talking and working when these conversations were
occuring. I also think another aspect of this is that promigenture
was eliminated. Everybody had to had to work to get their own.
Being aware of how the politics were straying was important to
making it possible to acquire property and making it possible
to keep it no matter who was ruling.
|
Of course. Being property owner meant being free. And, to large
extent, this is still true today.
| Quote: |
The above observation also contradicts the general assumption that
an "educated" populace is needed for a democracy.
That depends on ...
This one has led me down a path of trying to define educated now.
Ahh, you're getting there now.
If you look at the list of the Framers of the Constitution, you find
quite a few who had no more than high school education. Granted, most
had some college, but rarely above a BA level. Yet, in their writings
you see clarity of mind and comprehension of reality which you'll
rarely find among best educated academics of today.
I had assumed that most of their training was done at home doing
real work.
That was big part, for sure.
I haven't found out how they learned about European histories and
stuff.
Books, books, books.
For some strange reason, I keep assuming
that books were very rare and not available to non-monied people.
I don't know where I keep getting this from.
You're confusing time frames, I think. Books ware rare and expensive
in the middle ages, when they very being copied by hand. But the time
frame you're talking about is more than 3 centuries after the
invention of the printing press. At this point prices were low enough
for common people being able to afford them. Heck, they already had
newspapers at that time, that tells you a lot about the cost of print.
I haven't overlooked newspapers nor the fact that printing was
a common business. I think I was leaping from the bit of knowledge
that Ben Franklin started the notion of public libraries. Before
then libraries were private. Hence, if they were private, only
the owners had access to those books. Other than the Bible,
I assumed that people who have not yet acquired property would
not have an extensive library available to them.
Not necessary extensive, but some. Wealthy people might've owned |
thousands of volumes, average people just few dozens. But it wasn't
out of reach. In a society where disposable print (aka newspapers) is
available, print is affordable.
| Quote: |
It cannot have the meaning the ivy-stuffed heads say it is.
Indeed. Their meaning is along the "mutual adoration society" lines.
ah, thank you. A much better description.
I ran across a person who had a major in science but dismissed coal
miners as unskilled workers. Where did this kind of attitude start?
And is it new?
It is new, and it isn't. Disdain towards people with dirt under their
fingernails goes all the way back to antiquity (and goes a long way
towards explaining the tendency of Greek scientists to prefer
theoretical discourse over experiments). What is new, dating to more
or less the second half of the 19th century, is the emergence of the
"intelligentsia" as a social class, with pretensions of superiority.
reading through various books of the period you see as recurring theme
the pretensions of the intelligentsia to be the modern day
aristocracy.
Yes. I have one of those. It was written by a Polish woman
who told about one of the German invasions around the turn
of the century. From her POV, her servants couldn't cope without
her guidance, but this made no sense.
Makes perfect sense, that's the intelligentsia's justification for
their claim to supremacy, "these commoners, they're like children,
without us they'll be lost".
I beleive that is a direct quote.
|
It might be:-) I know the style, my family was Eastern European
intelligentsia.
| Quote: |
Sounds familiar?
In Massachusetts and female? Are you kidding?!
I was thinking more along the lines of Massachusetts Democrats. |
| Quote: | There was other strange
attitudes. There was almost a hatred of grocers who did manage
to get food for resale in the citified areas. There was no
appreciation for the grocers' accomplishments despite the laws
that made the actions fatal if caught.
Yes, for a member of the intelligentsia seeing "uncultured people"
succeed where the "refined" ones fail was a mortal insult.
I'm currently having a fight right now where somebody is insisting
that I could afford to waste money that I didn't have. This
is that cognitive dissonance again..isn't it?
|
Might well be, yes.
| Quote: |
However, although all the pretensiousness of aristocracy
was there, the other attributes of aristocracy, namely wealth and
power, didn't quite materialize. In order to compensate, the
intelligentsia developed an intense disdain towards anything practical
as being lowely and undignified.
All this is a gross overgeneralization,
Yes, I understand.
of course, with cheap amateur
psychology to boot. Take if for what it is worth.
It may be cheap psych but I am finding a strong correlation
with this kind of thought process and a 100% divorce from
reality. Take our crop of Democrats...One of them stood in
the middle of rubble of tunnel that fell apart, and declared
out loud, "The tunnels are safe." Hello?[ emoticon knocking
on wooden head] Where did you say you dropped your brains
off for dry cleaning? I am encountering instances of abject
stupidity almost weekly now. The rate has increased.
Maybe. The question that comes to mind is formulated in one of Greg's
sigs, "are the idiots getting dumber or only lauder?"
Neither. It has become mandatory to be stupid. There have been
laws passed to make sure our brightest are either drugged or
hog-tied as kids. It is considered to be admirable to break laws
that deal with cooperation.
snip
A stable human society is made of a stew of followers,
spiced with a dash of leaders. With too many bright, independent
minded and critical individuals societies lose stability.
These are the anarchists; I seem to be tripping over this
attitude, right and left, over the past year.
Aha. Now, imagine what would happen if those would constitute, say,
10% of the society.
I don't have to imagine; I think I'm seeing 50% of society on
the east coast.
Consider ancient Greece.
I have no information to do this. I'll have to watch out
for a book on this one. Didn't Greece have a common culture
rather than a common politics that unified it such that we,
wearing hindsight glasses, can clump it as a civilization?
Oh, it sure had a common culture and it sure qualifies as a
civilization. However, as society and political entity they were
hopelessly fragmented, thus they expendended most of their energies on
internal fighting, failing to become the great power they could've be
otherwise.
Right. The US avoided this by writing the Constitution and
getting everybody to agree to work within those rules.
Nice, but insufficient. Look how many other countries wrote
constitutions, since then, with no much effect. Heck, look how many
countries are on their third or fourth constitution. It is not a god
given law that whoever agreed to some rules today, will still agree
tomorrow. And given a sufficiently quarrelsome population, the above
is unlikely to happen.
The states weren't agreeable at all. There were border fights.
The territories were always fighting until enough coalesced into
deciding they needed to cooperate enough to be a state and member
of the union. Then the Civil War had to happen to settle the
transitions into the industrial revolution.
|
All true, yet there was enough common glue there to hold it. Barely
enough, but enough.
| Quote: | There are still
states fighting over border definitions. The difference is
that they hire lawyers instead of soldiers and use weapons of
words rather than bullets.
And this difference is called *being agreeable*. Because in |
principle, when the words and the lawyers failed to deliver to you
what you want, there is in principle the next option, which is use
bullets. Yet, since the Civil War this didn't happen.
| Quote: | I think the reaons the US' worked is because everybody who
did come to the US had a high intolerance level of being
told what to do with themselves. We're still allergic
to that.
|
That's not good enough. The Greeks had ample measure of this. It is
the right medicine to prevent establishment of tyranny but, by itself,
it can have just the opposite (and equally detrimental) effect, this
of disintegration.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:45 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <1153227547.483785.146100@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <1tfrziumomalh.17em118zgwqhg$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Math Freak <MathFreak@FakeAddress.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 06 09:46:45 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
In article <6qgzl041mrrt.17ipig70yv5ge$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Math Freak <MathFreak@FakeAddress.com> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 06 12:13:28 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
Iranians doing "viscious acts" against other humans?
Yes. The intention has been announced.
Giving a rapist a good lesson is hardly viscious.
You are still following your usual posting pattern. By the
third post, you start to try to intimidate me with sexual
abuse. You still have not learned that this doesn't work.
"Rapist" is a good analogy for an Israeli individual.
If you have problem with this, it's not my doing.
I have a problem whenever you lie.
And look who's talking.
In addition, your assumptions are wrong. The religion I was
raised in did not exist 2500 years ago.
Oh yes it did, it was called tribalism. Plus, a rapist
may also have a religion but who cares. He's a rapist
first. You're a pro-Israeli first. I mentioned Purim to
show how backward, thugs at best, those people have
been and for how long at that.
Ah, you have to blame some random people who lived
thousands of years ago for your shortcoming. That
will not fix anything.
Your pro-Israeliness is not fixable honey, and your
pro-Israeliness was the subject,
No, it wasn't. It is you who keeps bringing this one
up.
It's because that's what has always been in your way to
get to become a better person. Really! Nobody is joking
here.
I know nobody is joking and I am taking your attitude very
seriously.
not my "shortcomings".
Life offered thousands of ways to a specimen like you
to prevent yourself from becoming one and ... . Grow
up.
I am grown up. You and your ilk keep telling me
that you intend to murder me and mine and destroy our
way of living. Any talk or action to defend myself is
belitteled as being immature and, for some bizarre reason,
pro-Israeli. Your thinking is illogical and has absolutely
no basis in reality.
That's because you don't trust me. I am not telling you
lies. You're a pro-Israeli, and thus conducting a foul
irresponsible sinful life in the eyes of every decent
person in the world. Your problems are your own
creations! Go Islam.
You classify every person, who is not going to voluntarily be
your slave, as pro-Israeli. This includes Jews, Christians,
other Muslims, Hindu, Chinese to identify a few groups.
Lloyd identifies everyone who disagrees with him as a creationist,
born-again christians identify everyone of a different faith as
heathens. It's the standard dehumanizing we/they attitude practiced by
the most ignorant of fanatics since the dawn of time.
|
This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
| Quote: | For the record here, I AM an israel supporter, because the muslim
world has proven every time it has had the means that it is incapable
of functioning in the modern world.
|
Lack of capability is not the problem. The problem is losing
control, thus power, over certain aspects of Islamic life.
| Quote: | However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose.
|
Nuts. I have no respect for people who intend to destroy western
civilization and relish in their visciousness. Respect is to be
earned...by an individual, and not by an organization of religious
zealots. These types solve all their problems by killing people
who have nothing to do with causing those problems. Since the
problems will never solved using this tactic, the killing will
continue and escalate until there is no more opportunity.
What these people are doing is going back to the "good ol days"
of the Assasins and are repeating that history. The difference
between the two times is the existence of modern means to kill
millions with one remote act. Thus, the honor that the old
Assasins had (killing in person) has been removed from the
creed.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
science forum beginner
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1tfrziumomalh.17em118zgwqhg$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Math Freak <MathFreak@FakeAddress.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 06 09:46:45 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
In article <6qgzl041mrrt.17ipig70yv5ge$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Math Freak <MathFreak@FakeAddress.com> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 06 12:13:28 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
Iranians doing "viscious acts" against other humans?
Yes. The intention has been announced.
Giving a rapist a good lesson is hardly viscious.
You are still following your usual posting pattern. By the
third post, you start to try to intimidate me with sexual
abuse. You still have not learned that this doesn't work.
"Rapist" is a good analogy for an Israeli individual.
If you have problem with this, it's not my doing.
I have a problem whenever you lie.
And look who's talking.
In addition, your assumptions are wrong. The religion I was
raised in did not exist 2500 years ago.
Oh yes it did, it was called tribalism. Plus, a rapist
may also have a religion but who cares. He's a rapist
first. You're a pro-Israeli first. I mentioned Purim to
show how backward, thugs at best, those people have
been and for how long at that.
Ah, you have to blame some random people who lived
thousands of years ago for your shortcoming. That
will not fix anything.
Your pro-Israeliness is not fixable honey, and your
pro-Israeliness was the subject,
No, it wasn't. It is you who keeps bringing this one
up.
It's because that's what has always been in your way to
get to become a better person. Really! Nobody is joking
here.
I know nobody is joking and I am taking your attitude very
seriously.
not my "shortcomings".
Life offered thousands of ways to a specimen like you
to prevent yourself from becoming one and ... . Grow
up.
I am grown up. You and your ilk keep telling me
that you intend to murder me and mine and destroy our
way of living. Any talk or action to defend myself is
belitteled as being immature and, for some bizarre reason,
pro-Israeli. Your thinking is illogical and has absolutely
no basis in reality.
That's because you don't trust me. I am not telling you
lies. You're a pro-Israeli, and thus conducting a foul
irresponsible sinful life in the eyes of every decent
person in the world. Your problems are your own
creations! Go Islam.
You classify every person, who is not going to voluntarily be
your slave, as pro-Israeli. This includes Jews, Christians,
other Muslims, Hindu, Chinese to identify a few groups.
|
Lloyd identifies everyone who disagrees with him as a creationist,
born-again christians identify everyone of a different faith as
heathens. It's the standard dehumanizing we/they attitude practiced by
the most ignorant of fanatics since the dawn of time.
For the record here, I AM an israel supporter, because the muslim
world has proven every time it has had the means that it is incapable
of functioning in the modern world.
However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
science forum beginner
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 4:21 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
| Quote: | Iranians doing "viscious acts" against other humans?
Yes. The intention has been announced.
Giving a rapist a good lesson is hardly viscious.
You are still following your usual posting pattern. By the
third post, you start to try to intimidate me with sexual
abuse. You still have not learned that this doesn't work.
"Rapist" is a good analogy for an Israeli individual.
If you have problem with this, it's not my doing.
I have a problem whenever you lie.
And look who's talking.
In addition, your assumptions are wrong. The religion I was
raised in did not exist 2500 years ago.
Oh yes it did, it was called tribalism. Plus, a rapist
may also have a religion but who cares. He's a rapist
first. You're a pro-Israeli first. I mentioned Purim to
show how backward, thugs at best, those people have
been and for how long at that.
Ah, you have to blame some random people who lived
thousands of years ago for your shortcoming. That
will not fix anything.
Your pro-Israeliness is not fixable honey, and your
pro-Israeliness was the subject,
No, it wasn't. It is you who keeps bringing this one
up.
It's because that's what has always been in your way to
get to become a better person. Really! Nobody is joking
here.
I know nobody is joking and I am taking your attitude very
seriously.
not my "shortcomings".
Life offered thousands of ways to a specimen like you
to prevent yourself from becoming one and ... . Grow
up.
I am grown up. You and your ilk keep telling me
that you intend to murder me and mine and destroy our
way of living. Any talk or action to defend myself is
belitteled as being immature and, for some bizarre reason,
pro-Israeli. Your thinking is illogical and has absolutely
no basis in reality.
That's because you don't trust me. I am not telling you
lies. You're a pro-Israeli, and thus conducting a foul
irresponsible sinful life in the eyes of every decent
person in the world. Your problems are your own
creations! Go Islam.
You classify every person, who is not going to voluntarily be
your slave, as pro-Israeli. This includes Jews, Christians,
other Muslims, Hindu, Chinese to identify a few groups.
Lloyd identifies everyone who disagrees with him as a creationist,
born-again christians identify everyone of a different faith as
heathens. It's the standard dehumanizing we/they attitude practiced by
the most ignorant of fanatics since the dawn of time.
This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
|
No, it cannot be blithely dismissed any more than the rest of the
ignorant fanatics throughout history could be.
For instance, hitler, stallin, the khmer rouge, or bin laden.
"you are better than everyone else" is an easy concept to sell. and
from there "we should kill all the inferiors" is even easier. after
that, the pure enjoyment of killing takes over.
| Quote: | For the record here, I AM an israel supporter, because the muslim
world has proven every time it has had the means that it is incapable
of functioning in the modern world.
Lack of capability is not the problem. The problem is losing
control, thus power, over certain aspects of Islamic life.
|
Read the koran. This is exactly what is demanded in every line of
it.
| Quote: | However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose.
Nuts. I have no respect for people who intend to destroy western
civilization and relish in their visciousness. Respect is to be
earned...by an individual, and not by an organization of religious
zealots. These types solve all their problems by killing people
who have nothing to do with causing those problems. Since the
problems will never solved using this tactic, the killing will
continue and escalate until there is no more opportunity.
|
I have respect for their commitment, not their goals. I am
reminded of on september 11, Shrub refered to it as a "cowardly"
attack. there is nothing cowardly about those who volunteer to die for
their convictions. now if their convictions weren't such an evil pile
of yak manure...
| Quote: | What these people are doing is going back to the "good ol days"
of the Assasins and are repeating that history. The difference
between the two times is the existence of modern means to kill
millions with one remote act. Thus, the honor that the old
Assasins had (killing in person) has been removed from the
creed.
|
No, they are trying to preserve the way of life dictated to them
by mohammed. and they are doing so by the methods set down in the
Koran. The koran demands only 2 classes of people, believers and
corpses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:28 am Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <1153239660.136610.41660@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Iranians doing "viscious acts" against other humans?
Yes. The intention has been announced.
Giving a rapist a good lesson is hardly viscious.
You are still following your usual posting pattern. By the
third post, you start to try to intimidate me with sexual
abuse. You still have not learned that this doesn't work.
"Rapist" is a good analogy for an Israeli individual.
If you have problem with this, it's not my doing.
I have a problem whenever you lie.
And look who's talking.
In addition, your assumptions are wrong. The religion I was
raised in did not exist 2500 years ago.
Oh yes it did, it was called tribalism. Plus, a rapist
may also have a religion but who cares. He's a rapist
first. You're a pro-Israeli first. I mentioned Purim to
show how backward, thugs at best, those people have
been and for how long at that.
Ah, you have to blame some random people who lived
thousands of years ago for your shortcoming. That
will not fix anything.
Your pro-Israeliness is not fixable honey, and your
pro-Israeliness was the subject,
No, it wasn't. It is you who keeps bringing this one
up.
It's because that's what has always been in your way to
get to become a better person. Really! Nobody is joking
here.
I know nobody is joking and I am taking your attitude very
seriously.
not my "shortcomings".
Life offered thousands of ways to a specimen like you
to prevent yourself from becoming one and ... . Grow
up.
I am grown up. You and your ilk keep telling me
that you intend to murder me and mine and destroy our
way of living. Any talk or action to defend myself is
belitteled as being immature and, for some bizarre reason,
pro-Israeli. Your thinking is illogical and has absolutely
no basis in reality.
That's because you don't trust me. I am not telling you
lies. You're a pro-Israeli, and thus conducting a foul
irresponsible sinful life in the eyes of every decent
person in the world. Your problems are your own
creations! Go Islam.
You classify every person, who is not going to voluntarily be
your slave, as pro-Israeli. This includes Jews, Christians,
other Muslims, Hindu, Chinese to identify a few groups.
Lloyd identifies everyone who disagrees with him as a creationist,
born-again christians identify everyone of a different faith as
heathens. It's the standard dehumanizing we/they attitude practiced by
the most ignorant of fanatics since the dawn of time.
This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
No, it cannot be blithely dismissed any more than the rest of the
ignorant fanatics throughout history could be.
|
These are not ignorant people. The tactics show that there
is a broad knowledge of Western civilization's mores, laws,
and rules of engagement.
| Quote: | For instance, hitler, stallin, the khmer rouge, or bin laden.
"you are better than everyone else" is an easy concept to sell.
|
I don't see much of this rhetoric. I do see a lot of martyr talk
with promises of heavenly rewards. I also see a very perverse
sexual identity crises. It's all males...middle class males.
| Quote: | and
from there "we should kill all the inferiors" is even easier. after
that, the pure enjoyment of killing takes over.
|
But the message isn't about inferiors. The incentive is all about
revenge. There is a huge difference because the latter ensures
control of the faithful.
| Quote: |
For the record here, I AM an israel supporter, because the muslim
world has proven every time it has had the means that it is incapable
of functioning in the modern world.
Lack of capability is not the problem. The problem is losing
control, thus power, over certain aspects of Islamic life.
Read the koran. This is exactly what is demanded in every line of
it.
|
It is a middle class text that rather ignores those who do the work.
Those who do work are forced to break a lot of the Koran rules.
Especially the women. Male farmers have to be more practical than
the current interpretations of the Koran. Once upon a time,
women were leaders, too, and were not required to wear cover.
I have read that this clothes fashion was mimicing the Byzantine
styles but I've not verified that author's statement.
| Quote: |
However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose.
Nuts. I have no respect for people who intend to destroy western
civilization and relish in their visciousness. Respect is to be
earned...by an individual, and not by an organization of religious
zealots. These types solve all their problems by killing people
who have nothing to do with causing those problems. Since the
problems will never solved using this tactic, the killing will
continue and escalate until there is no more opportunity.
I have respect for their commitment, not their goals.
|
Then you have a very different defintion of respect than I do.
Respect implies admiration. I don't admire vermin. I don't
admire anybody who intends to kill me and destroy my way
of life just because it and I exist.
| Quote: | I am
reminded of on september 11, Shrub refered to it as a "cowardly"
attack. there is nothing cowardly about those who volunteer to die for
their convictions.
|
They did not volunteer. Only the psychotic were the ones who
knew. What the minions are getting told is that their suicide
will be rewarded. This is contrary to Koran teachings. If
these suicides were all volunteers, why are they drugged so
they cannot think?
| Quote: | now if their convictions weren't such an evil pile
of yak manure...
|
These ideologues don't have convictions, they have power lust.
The Taliban ignored their convictions in favor of satisfying
their lust; and this was helped by Al Queda.
| Quote: |
What these people are doing is going back to the "good ol days"
of the Assasins and are repeating that history. The difference
between the two times is the existence of modern means to kill
millions with one remote act. Thus, the honor that the old
Assasins had (killing in person) has been removed from the
creed.
No, they are trying to preserve the way of life dictated to them
by mohammed.
|
No. They are trying to preserve an interpretation of how it
"used to be"; but there are so many exceptions that they are
rewriteing the Koran.
| Quote: | and they are doing so by the methods set down in the
Koran. The koran demands only 2 classes of people, believers and
corpses.
|
No. The Koran tolerates Jews and Christains; they are just taxed
more.
And killing is limited to soldiers, not the general populace. This
is another misinterpretation of the Koran. There was a time in
Islam's history when non-combatents were murdered. The group
was called the Assasins; they were allowed to exist as long
as their targets were limited to political heads of state. When
they started to kill non-political people, the sect was
eliminated. They had crossed the line. The current crop have
already crossed this line. It doesn't appear that fellow Muslims
are dealing with their own berserkers. This is understandable since
it does take time to react. I just don't think, with today's access
of WMDs, that the reaction will be in time to prevent an unrecoverable
mess. Instead, they are again unconsciously emulating the Europeans
who are letting the US take all the responsibility and blame and
do most of the work.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:22 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <nNvug.2$25.230@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
| Quote: | This is my usual style of trying to take a complex system apart
for the purpose of identifying the key components in order
to get something to work a little bit.
As for the tangent, I do get sidetracked easily these days.
snip
So do I, only this topic is growing too big already.
|
It gets even bigger. I've had to start learning about how
the federal reserve works. I'm having a very difficult time
of it. I'm even going to have to dirty my hem and learn
about politics. yetcho.
<snip>
| Quote: | The above observation also contradicts the general assumption that
an "educated" populace is needed for a democracy.
That depends on ...
This one has led me down a path of trying to define educated now.
Ahh, you're getting there now.
If you look at the list of the Framers of the Constitution, you find
quite a few who had no more than high school education. Granted, most
had some college, but rarely above a BA level. Yet, in their writings
you see clarity of mind and comprehension of reality which you'll
rarely find among best educated academics of today.
I had assumed that most of their training was done at home doing
real work.
That was big part, for sure.
I haven't found out how they learned about European histories and
stuff.
Books, books, books.
For some strange reason, I keep assuming
that books were very rare and not available to non-monied people.
I don't know where I keep getting this from.
You're confusing time frames, I think. Books ware rare and expensive
in the middle ages, when they very being copied by hand. But the time
frame you're talking about is more than 3 centuries after the
invention of the printing press. At this point prices were low enough
for common people being able to afford them. Heck, they already had
newspapers at that time, that tells you a lot about the cost of print.
I haven't overlooked newspapers nor the fact that printing was
a common business. I think I was leaping from the bit of knowledge
that Ben Franklin started the notion of public libraries. Before
then libraries were private. Hence, if they were private, only
the owners had access to those books. Other than the Bible,
I assumed that people who have not yet acquired property would
not have an extensive library available to them.
Not necessary extensive, but some. Wealthy people might've owned
thousands of volumes, average people just few dozens. But it wasn't
out of reach. In a society where disposable print (aka newspapers) is
available, print is affordable.
|
Ah! And the Federalist and Unfederalist Papers were published
in the newspapers. Of course.
<snip>
| Quote: | Makes perfect sense, that's the intelligentsia's justification for
their claim to supremacy, "these commoners, they're like children,
without us they'll be lost".
I beleive that is a direct quote. :-)
It might be:-) I know the style, my family was Eastern European
intelligentsia.
Sounds familiar?
In Massachusetts and female? Are you kidding?!
I was thinking more along the lines of Massachusetts Democrats.
|
They are still trying to shove it down my throat. The poor
babies have been side-tracked a little bit. The bad news
is that Kennedy and Kerry aren't taking part in the
distraction.
| Quote: | Consider ancient Greece.
I have no information to do this. I'll have to watch out
for a book on this one. Didn't Greece have a common culture
rather than a common politics that unified it such that we,
wearing hindsight glasses, can clump it as a civilization?
Oh, it sure had a common culture and it sure qualifies as a
civilization. However, as society and political entity they were
hopelessly fragmented, thus they expendended most of their energies on
internal fighting, failing to become the great power they could've be
otherwise.
Right. The US avoided this by writing the Constitution and
getting everybody to agree to work within those rules.
Nice, but insufficient. Look how many other countries wrote
constitutions, since then, with no much effect. Heck, look how many
countries are on their third or fourth constitution. It is not a god
given law that whoever agreed to some rules today, will still agree
tomorrow. And given a sufficiently quarrelsome population, the above
is unlikely to happen.
The states weren't agreeable at all. There were border fights.
The territories were always fighting until enough coalesced into
deciding they needed to cooperate enough to be a state and member
of the union. Then the Civil War had to happen to settle the
transitions into the industrial revolution.
All true, yet there was enough common glue there to hold it. Barely
enough, but enough.
|
Oh, they had a common enemy. European acquisition.
| Quote: |
There are still
states fighting over border definitions. The difference is
that they hire lawyers instead of soldiers and use weapons of
words rather than bullets.
And this difference is called *being agreeable*. Because in
principle, when the words and the lawyers failed to deliver to you
what you want, there is in principle the next option, which is use
bullets. Yet, since the Civil War this didn't happen.
|
It's easier to send your pet lawyers to court than convince
your men to kill the guy in the next state who is supplying
your raw material.
| Quote: |
I think the reaons the US' worked is because everybody who
did come to the US had a high intolerance level of being
told what to do with themselves. We're still allergic
to that.
That's not good enough. The Greeks had ample measure of this. It is
the right medicine to prevent establishment of tyranny but, by itself,
it can have just the opposite (and equally detrimental) effect, this
of disintegration.
|
But the Greeks were not all inclusive. The people who did the
real work didn't have a say...did they?
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:43 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
In article <1153317120.831488.226840@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
No, it cannot be blithely dismissed any more than the rest of the
ignorant fanatics throughout history could be.
These are not ignorant people. The tactics show that there
is a broad knowledge of Western civilization's mores, laws,
and rules of engagement.
Their tactics show that they watch the movies. If they wanted to
hurt us instead of making political statements, and knew anything in
particular about our culture and society, 20 men could bring us to our
knees.
For instance, hitler, stallin, the khmer rouge, or bin laden.
"you are better than everyone else" is an easy concept to sell.
I don't see much of this rhetoric. I do see a lot of martyr talk
with promises of heavenly rewards. I also see a very perverse
sexual identity crises. It's all males...middle class males.
You do not attend mosques. What do you consider "the great satan"
to be?
|
Nobody.
| Quote: | In chechnya (one of the reasons that I respect and wish to kill
the muslim world is that they are a problem EVERYWHERE) it's women
mostly.
|
Huh?
| Quote: |
and
from there "we should kill all the inferiors" is even easier. after
that, the pure enjoyment of killing takes over.
But the message isn't about inferiors. The incentive is all about
revenge. There is a huge difference because the latter ensures
control of the faithful.
Inferiors has many sides. they consider us to be morally inferior
subhumans.
|
This has its base in Nazism. That is a new attitude not an Islamic
one.
<snip>
| Quote: | However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose.
Nuts. I have no respect for people who intend to destroy western
civilization and relish in their visciousness. Respect is to be
earned...by an individual, and not by an organization of religious
zealots. These types solve all their problems by killing people
who have nothing to do with causing those problems. Since the
problems will never solved using this tactic, the killing will
continue and escalate until there is no more opportunity.
I have respect for their commitment, not their goals.
Then you have a very different defintion of respect than I do.
Respect implies admiration. I don't admire vermin. I don't
admire anybody who intends to kill me and destroy my way
of life just because it and I exist.
Then it is NEVER possible to respect an enemy?
|
Not one whose goal is to first, destroy, then to self-destruct.
This comes under my category of abject stupidity; there is no
room for respect of that.
| Quote: | You are therefore
doomed to lose every war you fight. One truth is that if we are
allowed to continue to exist, their way of life is doomed. Bill
clinton was every bit as much an enemy of islam
|
<snort> Now tell me another one.
| Quote: | as is W. just on a
different front.
|
I see no evidence that Bush is an enemy of Islam. His primary job
is national security of US citizens and their possessions.
| Quote: | Yes, I respect muslims, bin laden, and averyone else who stands
for what they believe, it's more than I can say about ourselves.
|
But the ideologues are not standing up for what they believe; they
are puling words to gain political power and thus, access to
monies and means.
| Quote: | At
the same time, it's them or us, someone gotta die. I would far rather
it be the islamic world than the western.
|
This isn't a conflict between all of Islam and Western civilization...
yet. That is what Bin Laden is trying to foment with his little
spin doctoring lately.
| Quote: |
I am
reminded of on september 11, Shrub refered to it as a "cowardly"
attack. there is nothing cowardly about those who volunteer to die for
their convictions.
They did not volunteer. Only the psychotic were the ones who
knew. What the minions are getting told is that their suicide
will be rewarded. This is contrary to Koran teachings. If
these suicides were all volunteers, why are they drugged so
they cannot think?
They weren't. The 9-11 hijackers volunteered and went to a great
deal of effort to do what they did. Belittling them prevents you from
fighting as you need to.
|
Perhaps you should examine them again.
| Quote: |
now if their convictions weren't such an evil pile
of yak manure...
These ideologues don't have convictions, they have power lust.
The Taliban ignored their convictions in favor of satisfying
their lust; and this was helped by Al Queda.
you are wrong. The koran sets down laws for society. All the
taliban did was read it and follow.
|
Does this include transforming females into whores?
| Quote: |
What these people are doing is going back to the "good ol days"
of the Assasins and are repeating that history. The difference
between the two times is the existence of modern means to kill
millions with one remote act. Thus, the honor that the old
Assasins had (killing in person) has been removed from the
creed.
No, they are trying to preserve the way of life dictated to them
by mohammed.
No. They are trying to preserve an interpretation of how it
"used to be"; but there are so many exceptions that they are
rewriteing the Koran.
No, all they are doing is following it to the letter.
and they are doing so by the methods set down in the
Koran. The koran demands only 2 classes of people, believers and
corpses.
No. The Koran tolerates Jews and Christains; they are just taxed
more.
Show me.
|
Jews were the ones who did the business of business during the
Ottoman Empire. There were Jewish and Christian areas in the
cities. The Janissaries came from Christian lands..on purpose.
IIRC, the Grand Viziers were Jewish. Trade was done with non-Muslims.
Jews fled to Muslim-controlled lands when Europeans got bees up
their butt. If it were a pillar of Islam to kill all non-Muslims,
then those people wouldn't have moved there. There is (or was)
a special category for Jews and Christians because of their
relation to Abraham.
| Quote: |
And killing is limited to soldiers, not the general populace. This
is another misinterpretation of the Koran. There was a time in
Islam's history when non-combatents were murdered. The group
was called the Assasins; they were allowed to exist as long
as their targets were limited to political heads of state. When
they started to kill non-political people, the sect was
eliminated. They had crossed the line. The current crop have
already crossed this line. It doesn't appear that fellow Muslims
are dealing with their own berserkers. This is understandable since
it does take time to react. I just don't think, with today's access
of WMDs, that the reaction will be in time to prevent an unrecoverable
mess. Instead, they are again unconsciously emulating the Europeans
who are letting the US take all the responsibility and blame and
do most of the work.
Show me 1 line in the koran which says anything other than "kill
every non-muslim you find". this will continue until poor deluded
fools like you realize that this religious war is MANDATORY in their
religion.
|
I do not know how to read Arabic. So I cannot show you a line.
I'm talking about what I've read of its history.
/BAH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
science forum beginner
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:52 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
| Quote: | This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
No, it cannot be blithely dismissed any more than the rest of the
ignorant fanatics throughout history could be.
These are not ignorant people. The tactics show that there
is a broad knowledge of Western civilization's mores, laws,
and rules of engagement.
|
Their tactics show that they watch the movies. If they wanted to
hurt us instead of making political statements, and knew anything in
particular about our culture and society, 20 men could bring us to our
knees.
| Quote: | For instance, hitler, stallin, the khmer rouge, or bin laden.
"you are better than everyone else" is an easy concept to sell.
I don't see much of this rhetoric. I do see a lot of martyr talk
with promises of heavenly rewards. I also see a very perverse
sexual identity crises. It's all males...middle class males.
|
You do not attend mosques. What do you consider "the great satan"
to be? In chechnya (one of the reasons that I respect and wish to kill
the muslim world is that they are a problem EVERYWHERE) it's women
mostly.
| Quote: | and
from there "we should kill all the inferiors" is even easier. after
that, the pure enjoyment of killing takes over.
But the message isn't about inferiors. The incentive is all about
revenge. There is a huge difference because the latter ensures
control of the faithful.
|
Inferiors has many sides. they consider us to be morally inferior
subhumans.
| Quote: | For the record here, I AM an israel supporter, because the muslim
world has proven every time it has had the means that it is incapable
of functioning in the modern world.
Lack of capability is not the problem. The problem is losing
control, thus power, over certain aspects of Islamic life.
Read the koran. This is exactly what is demanded in every line of it.
It is a middle class text that rather ignores those who do the work.
Those who do work are forced to break a lot of the Koran rules.
Especially the women. Male farmers have to be more practical than
the current interpretations of the Koran. Once upon a time,
women were leaders, too, and were not required to wear cover.
I have read that this clothes fashion was mimicing the Byzantine
styles but I've not verified that author's statement.
However, also for the record, I have great respect for the islamic
world for it's strength and purpose.
Nuts. I have no respect for people who intend to destroy western
civilization and relish in their visciousness. Respect is to be
earned...by an individual, and not by an organization of religious
zealots. These types solve all their problems by killing people
who have nothing to do with causing those problems. Since the
problems will never solved using this tactic, the killing will
continue and escalate until there is no more opportunity.
I have respect for their commitment, not their goals.
Then you have a very different defintion of respect than I do.
Respect implies admiration. I don't admire vermin. I don't
admire anybody who intends to kill me and destroy my way
of life just because it and I exist.
|
Then it is NEVER possible to respect an enemy? You are therefore
doomed to lose every war you fight. One truth is that if we are
allowed to continue to exist, their way of life is doomed. Bill
clinton was every bit as much an enemy of islam as is W. just on a
different front.
Yes, I respect muslims, bin laden, and averyone else who stands
for what they believe, it's more than I can say about ourselves. At
the same time, it's them or us, someone gotta die. I would far rather
it be the islamic world than the western.
| Quote: | I am
reminded of on september 11, Shrub refered to it as a "cowardly"
attack. there is nothing cowardly about those who volunteer to die for
their convictions.
They did not volunteer. Only the psychotic were the ones who
knew. What the minions are getting told is that their suicide
will be rewarded. This is contrary to Koran teachings. If
these suicides were all volunteers, why are they drugged so
they cannot think?
|
They weren't. The 9-11 hijackers volunteered and went to a great
deal of effort to do what they did. Belittling them prevents you from
fighting as you need to.
| Quote: | now if their convictions weren't such an evil pile
of yak manure...
These ideologues don't have convictions, they have power lust.
The Taliban ignored their convictions in favor of satisfying
their lust; and this was helped by Al Queda.
|
you are wrong. The koran sets down laws for society. All the
taliban did was read it and follow.
| Quote: | What these people are doing is going back to the "good ol days"
of the Assasins and are repeating that history. The difference
between the two times is the existence of modern means to kill
millions with one remote act. Thus, the honor that the old
Assasins had (killing in person) has been removed from the
creed.
No, they are trying to preserve the way of life dictated to them
by mohammed.
No. They are trying to preserve an interpretation of how it
"used to be"; but there are so many exceptions that they are
rewriteing the Koran.
|
No, all they are doing is following it to the letter.
| Quote: | and they are doing so by the methods set down in the
Koran. The koran demands only 2 classes of people, believers and
corpses.
No. The Koran tolerates Jews and Christains; they are just taxed
more.
|
Show me.
| Quote: | And killing is limited to soldiers, not the general populace. This
is another misinterpretation of the Koran. There was a time in
Islam's history when non-combatents were murdered. The group
was called the Assasins; they were allowed to exist as long
as their targets were limited to political heads of state. When
they started to kill non-political people, the sect was
eliminated. They had crossed the line. The current crop have
already crossed this line. It doesn't appear that fellow Muslims
are dealing with their own berserkers. This is understandable since
it does take time to react. I just don't think, with today's access
of WMDs, that the reaction will be in time to prevent an unrecoverable
mess. Instead, they are again unconsciously emulating the Europeans
who are letting the US take all the responsibility and blame and
do most of the work.
|
Show me 1 line in the koran which says anything other than "kill
every non-muslim you find". this will continue until poor deluded
fools like you realize that this religious war is MANDATORY in their
religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bill
science forum beginner
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:28 pm Post subject:
Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
|
|
|
| Quote: | This attitude cannot be dismissed blithely. Saying the
word pro-Israeli is part of the political platform in Iran,
among other places because it produces the intended effect
without much difficulty; the intended effect is stop all
rational thinking about other matters. Even
Europe is accepting this kind of bizarre thinking in their
madness to try to placate Muslims by making them more equal
than everyone else. If this were purely a crank thinking,
I wouldn't spend a single bit dealing with it.
No, it cannot |
| | |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Science and Technology
»
Physics
»
Particle
