RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
http://www.bucksright.com/bush-proposed-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-supervision-i n-2003-1141 http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/09/18/ny-times-sept-2003-bush-propos ed-tightening-oversight-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-the-democrats-of-congr ess-blocked-it/ Apparently democrats received money from lobbyists. What say you Jed? Still want them in? A failure of the system of the free market - all the fault of the greedy capitalists? That's the angle we're being fed in the EU by the Labour party and BBC. Apparently: Obama - in only 143 days in the Senate - received a whopping $105,849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lobbyists. Would you acknowledge this and the above or are you too partisan? _ From: Remi Cornwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 00:59 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Lots of good stuff: http://www.capmag.com/ _ From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25 September 2008 23:55 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Jed
[Vo]:Google Project 10^100
Jed Rothwell wrote on 25 Sep 2008: Experts at the Naval Research Laboratory estimate that cold fusion can be fully developed and commercialized for roughly $300 million to $600 million, which is what it cost to develop similar surface effect, solid-state devices such as the Aegis radar. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: If my device works, it could be thousands of times more effective than the current CF reactors, and could be developed for less than 2 million dollars (and that's a very high estimate). With 2 or 3 dedicated people willing to work for free in their spare time and the availability of a good machine shop, a prototype could be built for a few thousand dollars. --- One advantage that CF does have over my design, is that it is essentially radiation free, while my design would most likely result in ordinary fusion reactions. However I think that considering the state the World is currently in, that many would be prepared to accept ordinary fusion as a stop gap measure until a radiation free form could be developed. --- I have chosen a different approach. Make a guess at the mechanism, and assume it is correct. Then optimize a design based upon the guess. Build the design. If the guess was correct, it will pay off. If not, then little is lost. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Hi Robin, I want to send you $1000 US for your project, no strings. Please post instructions. Thanks, Jack Smith
Re: [Vo]:Google Project 10^100
- Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip Quoting Ed Storms: It is not necessary for the breakthrough to lead directly to a practical device. I agree with Ed about this, but it should be noted that other people such as Mike Melich feel that theory is somewhat overrated and that it is possible to make practical devices without a theory. He is the one who pointed to the Aegis radar example. According to him, the materials problems were worked out by Edisonian techniques and even today the theory is somewhat inadequate to explain performance. (I expect it is better than cold fusion theory.) Aegis is a phased-array radar system. The antenna is a large flat plate with over a thousand individual radiating elements whose phase can be individually changed by a computer. The result is a well formed, electronically steered, beam which can flick across the sky, tracking multiple targets at the same time. The Aegis system has in mutiple trials intercepted incoming missiles. The phase shifting means is proprietary. Melich could be correct that its formulation was empirical, but it was well withing established knowledge. However, the situation in LENR is a bit different. Nobody has built even a 1 kW reactor and run it for weeks. We don't know what the consumables are in the long term. All we have are interesting effects. We don't need a comprehensive theory, only a means to get X kilowatt-months. And don't forget that that the kilowatts must be in excess of the power necessary to run the aparatus. Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
The choice is always the lesser of two evils. We never get perfection. Obama has less baggage than McCain, he is smarter, and he has a better plan. God only knows how well he will work out. People voted for Bush and Nixon with high expectations and look what happened. Each president does damage. The hope is the damage will be small enough to be repaired, which has been mostly the case. The damage caused by Bush may not be repairable any time soon. Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Remi Cornwall wrote: http://www.bucksright.com/bush-proposed-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-supervision-in-2003-1141 http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/09/18/ny-times-sept-2003-bush-proposed-tightening-oversight-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-the-democrats-of-congress-blocked-it/ Apparently democrats received money from lobbyists. What say you Jed? Still want them in? A failure of the system of the free market - all the fault of the greedy capitalists? That’s the angle we’re being fed in the EU by the Labour party and BBC. Apparently: Obama — in only 143 days in the Senate — received a whopping $105,849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lobbyists. Would you acknowledge this and the above or are you too partisan? From: Remi Cornwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 00:59 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Lots of good stuff: http://www.capmag.com/ From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25 September 2008 23:55 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Google Project 10^100
Mike Carrell wrote: The phase shifting means is proprietary. Melich could be correct that its formulation was empirical, but it was well withing established knowledge. He was discussing the materials used to make the components, not the electronics. The materials were tested and improved with Edisonian techniques. I suppose the electronics design was by first principles. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
- Original Message From: Edmund Storms The choice is always the lesser of two evils. We never get perfection. Obama has less baggage than McCain, he is smarter, and he has a better plan. Far less baggage -- ... and speaking of the overloaded portmanteau almost too ponderous to lift - apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
- Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] We never get perfection. I'll take that as an admission. From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Obama has less baggage than McCain, he is smarter, and he has a better plan. Plan for less not more government. The choice is always the lesser of two evils. So has the game plan been to shift the blame onto the free-market by those greedy capitalists and not the democrats then for vetoing reform? It seems the EU, Labour, the Church, the BBC, liberal academia, the veggies, Greenpeace and every enemy of America is trying that one. That is a conspiracy. Very Machiavellian. Someone said about the GOP in the old days being full of Ivy leaguers and old blood thinking they had a right to be on the board of every big company. The way I see it there's a blood line running though the democrats (even Obama). Replace board with more government. Very feudal and aristocratic isn't it? Plan for less not more government. The choice is always the lesser of two evils. _ On Sep 26, 2008, at 3:02 AM, Remi Cornwall wrote: http://www.bucksright.com/bush-proposed-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-supervision-i n-2003-1141 http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/09/18/ny-times-sept-2003-bush-propos ed-tightening-oversight-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-the-democrats-of-congr ess-blocked-it/ Apparently democrats received money from lobbyists. What say you Jed? Still want them in? A failure of the system of the free market - all the fault of the greedy capitalists? That's the angle we're being fed in the EU by the Labour party and BBC. Apparently: Obama - in only 143 days in the Senate - received a whopping $105,849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lobbyists. Would you acknowledge this and the above or are you too partisan? _ From: Remi Cornwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 00:59 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Lots of good stuff: http://www.capmag.com/ _ From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25 September 2008 23:55 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Jed
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
From Remi Cornwall The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. Silly me to think this but less government would appear to have resulted in nobody minding the store, nor the constitution for that matter. And look where that got us. Regardless of whether one agrees with this scenario or not, it seems very likely to me that there is going to HAVE to be more government regulation - to ameliorate the effects of greedy misbehavior, which has a tendency to flourish when the players believe nobody is watching them too closely. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. Agreed. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:book with chapter on cold fusion
From Harry Veeder Published this year http://www.amazon.com/Things-That-Dont-Make-Sense/dp/0385520689 Thirteen Things That Don't Make Sense: The Most Baffling Scientific Mysteries of Our Time It has a chapter on cold fusion. Harry Exerpt: To be sure, some of the chapters are more entertaining than others. A section on cold fusion, for example, while understandably necessary in a book on scientific mysteries, may not turn out to be quite as captivating for some readers as the chapters that precede and follow it. That may have something to do with the notion that cold fusion has been unfairly maligned and ridiculed by scientists despite its continuing promise, an argument Mr. Brooks lays out well. But it is ultimately in his chapters on the Big Bang, dark matter, and other issues that relate to the cosmos where Mr. Brooks, who holds a Ph.D. in quantum physics, really works his magic. No surprise then that Mr. Brooks is also co-writing a TV series for the Discovery Channel that explores the universe through the eyes of none other than Stephen Hawking. If 13 Things That Don't Make Sense is any indication, the series will find an enraptured audience. Sounds like a fun book to read! Thanks Harry. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Though I guess your thinking is: we'll either have big corporations or big government and the same people will end up on the board of either. Ultimately when seeking funds we end up facing old money and they get a seat on the board. Human nature being what it is, the same practices would get done in either system but at least you get the illusion of a clean-out every 4 years. Whereas to change anybody on the board of a listed company you'd need a lot of shares and, anyhow, this would be impossible in an unlisted company. It's all a question of how we change the hierarchies that intervene in our lives. So perhaps in one system there is more direct public accountability than just buying a company's produce and then making it powerful. By voting, the court of public opinion as FDR put it, takes a global stance on all human activity. (I'm sounding like a visitor from Mars here trying to understand humans. I'm thinking aloud.) The free market would then regard this as unwarranted intrusion in the day to day running and strategic planning of their businesses by an elite or mere public opinion. More importantly innovators who want to go it alone against public opinion would feel stifled in a system with large government much as say a Galileo or Kepler did in their time against the church. There again not everyone in the free-market are heroic innovators pushing boundaries but rather quite a few are grubby people benefiting from a wild west laissez-faire environment. It's a difficult one to square. The upshot of this is there is no utopia or nirvana for inventors. They will always have to interface with tardy people (or greater society) they despise to get permission to press ahead. Often elements out of their control will seem like fiat to the visionary. It seems then unless one is living on a desert island, politics (other people's opinion on where their boundaries start getting crossed) is inescapable and we must each choose, selfishly what pushes our own agenda. Then one must ask which system is the more innovative: free market, mixed economy, socialist? The answer would be shifting and pragmatic though is it particularly skewed to one end of the spectrum? -Original Message- From: Remi Cornwall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
[Vo]:H2 Storage
Although the problems of any large country like the USA moving to a hydrogen economy are too severe to even consider, at least without many breakthroughs in a number of fields - and in all likelihood we cannot afford H2 as even a partial solution for transportation fuel with present technology, there is one bit of bright news in hydrogen storage - titanium. But here is the curious thing - it is not exactly a Ti-hydride, and it requires a substrate of C-60 (buckyballs) onto which Ti is decorated [dunno why they chose that phrasing] http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/staff/taner/h2/tubec60tihx.html http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/staff/taner/ I hope that this particular storage method is perfected soon and exceeds expectations-because there are a few regions in the World - Iceland is one - with an huge excess of heating resources, but no transportation fuel. In these countries, the hydrogen economy does make sense, and that can relieve the demand pressure for limited oil sullies - for the rest of us. There could be more of these special circumstances if thermochemical H2 from nuclear is perfected. France comes to mind, since unlike us, they have embraced nuclear (despite its problems) as being the best possible economic solution and probably ecological, as well - at least of those which are available now. Jones
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
Re: [Vo]:Google Project 10^100
On Sep 25, 2008, at 11:05 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:05:23 -0600: Hi Ed, [snip] Evidence is growing for several mechanisms to be operating. We know that tritium can be produced on occasion without neutrons. Perhaps, the same mechanism makes neutrons without tritium. [snip] I find this somewhat confusing. The two common DD reactions are: D + D - T + p + 4 MeV (no neutrons) I and D + D - He3 + n + 3.3 MeV (one neutron).II Therefore, if only the first reaction takes place, then it is to be expected that T would be found with no neutrons. The second reaction would make neutrons, but would concurrently produce He3, not Tritium. Granted, in hot fusion, both reactions happen with about equal frequency, hence the concurrent production of both T and neutrons, however I see no reason why there couldn't be a shift in the ratio of the two reactions under the conditions of CF. (This may particularly be true if rather larger Deuterinos are involved, where the internuclear distance severely limits the reaction rate, thus perhaps enhancing any probability difference between the two reactions.) In that case I would expect it to be skewed toward the reaction with the largest energy release, and that is of course the first reaction. IOW I would expect to occasionally see T and protons, but rarely He3 plus neutrons. (It's easier for a neutron from one nucleus to tunnel across the gap to the other nucleus than for a proton to do so, because the neutron doesn't experience the Coulomb barrier - at least that's my simplistic explanation). I agree with much of your reasoning. However, we now know the tritium branch can be stimulated. Now we have a little evidence that the neutron branch might also be stimulated. Although the two branches are equal in hot fusion, the probably of stimulating each branch might depend on the environment in cold fusion. Stimulation of the He4 branch certainly depends on the environment, why not the other branches as well? You can also think of this in Mills' terms: On average in a Deuterino molecule, the nuclei will try to orient themselves such that the two protons are as far apart as possible (even at distance, before tunneling), which puts the two neutrons in the middle when tunneling does occur, preferentially resulting in the formation of T). If the distance between the nuclei gets very small OTOH, then it makes less and less difference, because the short range nuclear force will act without fear or favour, which is what we see with ordinary hot fusion, or with muon catalyzed fusion. Furthermore, in hot fusion the temperatures are so high that the rotational energy of the ions must of necessity also be high. That means that any preference the protons might have for staying as far apart as possible gets largely washed out. I suggest it is too early to suggest a mechanism. We are not yet sure the proposed neutrons are real. Regards, Ed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
From Remi Cornwall: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. Meanwhile, I suspect there are quite a few in this country who are becoming less and less convinced about the need for less government regulation in their lives and well-being. But alas, I suspect makes me sound like I'm a closet communist or perhaps something else just as evil. Of course, there is no perfect political system. Capitalism has it faults. So does communism, socialism, etc... We throw the dice and play it out. That's all we can do. A side comment: There seems to be this philosophy certain Americans adhere to, one that glorifies the concept of self-reliance and independence. To paraphrase, We don't want no guvment messing around with our god given right to do what we want to do. This notion seems to be a tad more prevalent in small town communities and rural settings. I find it curious that these notions of independence, a desire for non-government influence do not seem to be as idealized in larger communities and urban settings where its citizens learned a sobering fact that if they were going to get anything accomplished they had to agree to abide to a workable system, a set of rules (Do's and Dont's) in order to achieve common goals - or else fail together. There's only so much rural land and small town communities left in America where one can live the good life, where one can fulfill dreams of indulging in one's god given right to do what one wants to do, where there is no evil government interference telling them what they can and can not do. A more subtle point I'm trying to suggest here is that a real lasting sense of independence is more a state of mind, as compared to believing it can only be achieved through non-governmental interference. It seems to me that seeking the goal of less government intervention in our lives may ultimately be looking in the wrong place as one understandably seeks independence. But then, aren't we all seeking it in way way or other. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
The power of government always grows. This is a fact of life just like death and taxes. Complaining does no good and is a waste of time. The voters slightly control the rate of growth if they pay attention. Successful people find ways to use the system or to work under the radar. Right now, successful people have sold the securities that will fail and bought ones that will grow. In addition, the really successful people are in Washington writing the laws that will give them even more success. Only the treat of not being elected keeps the system under a little control. Of course, the ignorant will vote the same people back into power no matter what they do. These are the people who will suffer the most because they are not paying attention. Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Remi Cornwall wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? That's a odd question. Democratic governments never vote on anything. Only the voters do. US and British voters have repeatedly given our governments tremendous power in times of crisis, and then taken away these powers later on. That is the sensible thing to do. In the US, power was concentrated in the hands of the president during the Civil War, World War I, the Great Depression and World War II. As each of these crises ebbed away, the emergency powers and high taxes were gradually withdrawn. From 1942 until 1963 in the U.S., in response to WWII, the highest tax bracket varied from 88% to 92%. By 1963 the huge war debt was paid down (or inflated away) and tax brackets were lowered. See: http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=19 In the U.S., most emergency controls over the economy were lifted abruptly after the war, but not so quickly in the UK, where food was rationed from 1940 until 1954. No sane person questioned the need for rationing although perhaps it should have been ended earlier. From the 1950s through the 1970s the U.S. government regulated telecommunications, airlines, trucking, advertising and many other fields of commerce that today have been largely deregulated, because we decided that deregulation works better and also because in the case of telecommunications, the technology improved to allow more than one telephone company to serve effectively. These things constantly ebb and flow in response to changes in technology and public opinion. That is as it should be. There are no permanent solutions in politics or society. What works in one era does not necessarily work in another. FDR's policies were appropriate and effective to revive the 1930s industrial economy, but they would be ridiculous today. No solution is perfect. The balance of power between the branches of government also varies from one era to another in response to political developments, technology, the force of history, the personality of the chief executive and so on. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
Re: [Vo]:H2 Storage
- Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 12:13 PM Subject: [Vo]:H2 Storage Although the problems of any large country like the USA moving to a hydrogen economy are too severe to even consider, at least without many breakthroughs in a number of fields - and in all likelihood we cannot afford H2 as even a partial solution for transportation fuel with present technology, there is one bit of bright news in hydrogen storage - titanium. MC: Jones is forgetting BlackLight Power, about which he wrote a slightly negative artice for New Energy Times. BLP has made a significant breakthrough with its solid fuel technology and is now moving toward commercialization with a utility scale reactor and local hydrogen generators for hydrogen-converted cars. These are a couple of years away yet, but the basic technology is in place. Mike Carrell
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar-none. It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't worship them anymore in church or on thrones. This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or government with Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating going on. * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for poor judgement and embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his resume. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ of_keating_five In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from McCain operatives when the new SL Scandal become issue numeror uno in the public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but were able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual picture of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but are impressed with visual images?
[Vo]:Mysterious Dark Flow
Harry Veeder posted Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space By Clara Moskowitz As if the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy weren't vexing enough, another baffling cosmic puzzle has been discovered. Interesting subject Harry. I've been studying the writings of the author of this paper. A short synopsis is that Superlight which sounds a lot like the ZPE is emitted from black holes and permeates the universe. The Superlight part starts about 1/4 of the page down from the top. Some of his conclusions are flaky. Also there are some good links http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/milewski.htm http://www.hbci.com/%7Ewenonah/new/milewski.htm --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. I suppose it does to someone who believes in the ideal function of government. However, if you examine the actual behavior, you will find that the number of laws always grow in number and complexity. The tax laws are a good example. This may not be what people want to hear but it is a fact. Some of this growth takes placed because conditions change and new laws are required to control the technology. At the same time, industry works very hard to protect and enlarge its self interest. Most people have no idea what laws and rules exist until they are subjected to the legal system. In addition, the government works hard to hide many laws that benefit certain industries or individuals. Personally, I would rather accept how the system actually operates rather than be surprised because I have an ideal understanding of what I wish were true. Ed Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar- none. It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't worship them anymore in church or on thrones. This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or government with Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating going on. * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five posted last week by Ari Berman Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings loan crisis, John McCain intervened to protect SL magnate Charles Keating - a major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was later rebuked by the Senate
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. I said the voters took power back. Please do not distort my words. Are you under the impression that tax rates in the U.S. are still 90%? Is rationing still imposed in the UK? Is Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus is still in effect? * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert Everyone knows there has been some backsliding in the past eight years. The voters can demand that the Patriot Act be repealed, and I expect they will. If Obama is elected you can be sure he will support revision or repeal of this act. The U.S. has imposed serious violations of civil liberties many times in the past, especially in the 1790s, after WWI and WWII, and now during the War on Terrorism. Previous laws were found unconstitutional by the courts, or they were repealed. Any law can be repealed. Things do not always go downhill, irrevocably. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: The power of government always grows. Except when it shrinks. Of course some laws are repealed and some are no longer enforced unless you get caught doing something that threatens the government. Nevertheless, the number of laws on the books grows. Check at any legal library to see the size of case book law that has accumulated. Take a look at the tax code sometime. The Patriot Act generated a whole new collection of laws that I hope you never violate. The US government does not insist that all laws are enforced, depending where you live. For example, if you live in Los Alamos, NM, every law of every kind is enforced. On the other hand, Santa Fe is much more forgiving. Most people, if they play by the basic rules are ignored everywhere, unless you are black in certain neighborhoods. My point is, you have no idea what laws exist unless you are a lawyer or have been targeted by the legal system. Ed That's a rather silly thing to say, Ed. If it always grew then we would be living in a 1984 dystopia by now. In fact, the power of government in the US is far smaller than it used to be, when you take into account both local and national governments. In the 1840s, local governments in New England compelled men to shave their beards, and jailed them and beat the crap out of them when they refused. Governments made all forms of contraceptives illegal, and of course in the South they made marriage between races illegal. (Not to mention learning to read, getting paid for work, or leaving on one's own accord.) From circa 1900 to 1970, Federal and local governments sterilized thousands of people without their consent. Savage Jim Crow laws were enforced from the late 19th century well into the 1960s. (Actually, they are alive today, albeit attenuated. On Saturday I spoke with a middle-aged black woman whose mother, in Florida, was turned away from the polls in a recent election because there was a hyphen in her mailing address not shown on her driver's license. I guarantee that would never happen to a white voter! The Obama campaign has a full-time lawyer in Georgia fighting this kind of thing, but there are thousands of cases.) During World War I the government persecuted people of German descent, and during WWII it imprisoned 110,000 Americans of Japanese descent, robbing them of their houses, businesses and all of their material goods, while -- in many case -- their sons were serving in the U.S. Army, in some of the most highly decorated battalions in U.S. history. After the war, during the McCarthy era, persecution of dissent was widespread. There are countless other examples. Up until the 1960s, many First Amendment rights were a dead letter. Governments routinely invaded privacy, tapped peoples phones, beat prisoners suspected of crimes, fired people for expressing opinions or writing letters to the editor, and on, and on. I have a Life magazine article poking fun at a government employee who was summarily fired because they found out he performed in amateur ballet and modern dance on weekends. Going back to the colonial era, some New England local governments would invade people's households and check to be sure that parents have taught their children their ABCs by age 6, and that they were attending church every week. Children who did not learn were taken from their parents by force and raised by other families. People should learn the history of civil rights in the United States. I recommend I. Glasser, Visions of Liberty, Arcade, 1991. There is also far more economic freedom and genuine capitalism in the US than there used to be. The antitrust laws are called the Businessman's First Amendment for good reason. Before they were passed and later enforced, small businessmen did not have a chance against cartels and large businesses. Read about business practices before the 1920s and you will see that outrageous violations of business ethics were common, and the freedom to compete was largely an illusion. Compared to the past, we are now living in the golden era of individual rights and the freedom to do whatever you please. Right- wing commentators who claim otherwise know nothing about history, or -- in some cases -- they willfully ignore what happened to black people, Japanese-Americans, Native Americans, and other minorities. They pretend that only white people were part of history, and the others don't count. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
-Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:08 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: John McCain The Ghost of Keating Five Regarding the Keating Five and the Federal Home Loan Bank Board of 1989, four of the five were Democrats. Two were rebuked for poor judgment: John Glenn and John McCain. Of the three Democrats who were reprimanded for interfering with the FHLBB investigation, one, Senator DeConcini, was rewarded with an appointment by President Bill Clinton in February 1995 to the Board of Directors of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. All subsequent attempts at campaign finance reform came to nothing until the adoption of the McCain-Feingold Act in 2002. If you want to get into some relevant history, please google the history of Obama's current buddies Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers. Unrepentant Ayers was a bomb tossing, terroristic, America hating, radical who somehow managed to escape prosecution. I didn't start this political thread, and I stayed out of it for days, but I will continue to respond as necessary until it ends. Jeff
[Vo]:Impeachment
Jed Rothwell posted; Meanwhile, I am sorry to report that McCain has pulled dead even with Obama in the polls. See: http://gallup.com/home.aspx http://webmail.usfamily.net/web/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgallup.com%2Fhome.aspx Yes!! I'm going to put my McCain sign on my house, along with the Country First sign. If Obama cannot win in these circumstances, I fear he cannot win at all. If the Demcrats had nominated someone decient, a fiscally conservative prolife candidate, they'd wind by a landslide. But no, they had to nominate the man with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. If the abortion doesn't kill the baby, let it lie on the counter till it does die. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Good post Jed. Yes the view of history depends on your race. Yes there are shenanigans down south putting people off voting. Seen from their perspective they might cynically say that universal suffrage was just a bid to get poor, desperate voters - a guaranteed pool of votes. Some might even say by encouraging the message that capitalism stinks that this is a disincentive to self-improvement because the wealthy would then vote away. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. I just want to stop this simplistic notion GOP/Tory = bad, Labour/Democrat = Good, more government = good. There are false prophets. In the UK we live in a surveillance state which is becoming a police state. On average 300 cameras will catch your image a day. Then there's RIPA giving anyone in government (even a nosy local council worker) to look at your bank balance, tap your phone, monitor your movements and go through your bin. Then there is the national DNA database which even if you are cleared after an arrest still contains your (and by familiar match your whole family's) DNA - suspects for life. A national identity card scheme is on the way with biometric data and it will become routine to challenge for it. Then there are all the speech codes, banning of demonstrations within 1km of parliament. Compulsory organ donation (on death still) is on the way. Many more things. I'm getting ready to leave in a few years. All this in the name of a stealthily increasing state; the manner being: PROBLEM, REACTION, SOLUTION. Create a problem, get the public in a frenzy about it, then draft new powers. Imagine the inter-corporation cooperation (business to business, government to business, elite to elite) that all these cross-linked databases and powers will do to personal freedom. Yeah, corporations could have a suicide gene in a GM crop that just happens to fail because you've been mouthing off. The order comes from up high down the chain. Was it Gene Hackman in a film I can't remember with this line You're either police or little people. But then you've got your incorruptible representatives of the people. You send them up to the assembly and they get their noses in the trough PDQ. On this occasion, Jed, you may want the Democrats in office but keep it clean, a lie's a lie no matter how much lipstick you put on it. Just watch the bastards. -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 19:41 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Edmund Storms wrote: The power of government always grows. Except when it shrinks. That's a rather silly thing to say, Ed. If it always grew then we would be living in a 1984 dystopia by now. In fact, the power of government in the US is far smaller than it used to be, when you take into account both local and national governments. In the 1840s, local governments in New England compelled men to shave their beards, and jailed them and beat the crap out of them when they refused. Governments made all forms of contraceptives illegal, and of course in the South they made marriage between races illegal. (Not to mention learning to read, getting paid for work, or leaving on one's own accord.) From circa 1900 to 1970, Federal and local governments sterilized thousands of people without their consent. Savage Jim Crow laws were enforced from the late 19th century well into the 1960s. (Actually, they are alive today, albeit attenuated. On Saturday I spoke with a middle-aged black woman whose mother, in Florida, was turned away from the polls in a recent election because there was a hyphen in her mailing address not shown on her driver's license. I guarantee that would never happen to a white voter! The Obama campaign has a full-time lawyer in Georgia fighting this kind of thing, but there are thousands of cases.) During World War I the government persecuted people of German descent, and during WWII it imprisoned 110,000 Americans of Japanese descent, robbing them of their houses, businesses and all of their material goods, while -- in many case -- their sons were serving in the U.S. Army, in some of the most highly decorated battalions in U.S. history. After the war, during the McCarthy era, persecution of dissent was widespread. There are countless other examples. Up until the 1960s, many First Amendment rights were a dead letter. Governments routinely invaded privacy, tapped peoples phones, beat prisoners suspected of crimes, fired people for expressing opinions or writing letters to the editor, and on, and on. I have a Life magazine article poking fun at a government employee who was summarily fired because they found out he performed in amateur ballet and modern dance on weekends. Going back to the colonial era, some New England local governments would invade people's households and check to be sure that parents have taught their children their ABCs by age 6, and that they were
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
I guess you'd make a great Chinese citizen. -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 19:48 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. I suppose it does to someone who believes in the ideal function of government. However, if you examine the actual behavior, you will find that the number of laws always grow in number and complexity. The tax laws are a good example. This may not be what people want to hear but it is a fact. Some of this growth takes placed because conditions change and new laws are required to control the technology. At the same time, industry works very hard to protect and enlarge its self interest. Most people have no idea what laws and rules exist until they are subjected to the legal system. In addition, the government works hard to hide many laws that benefit certain industries or individuals. Personally, I would rather accept how the system actually operates rather than be surprised because I have an ideal understanding of what I wish were true. Ed Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar- none. It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't worship them anymore in church or on thrones. This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or government with Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating going on. * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little refresher lesson in how recent political history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. I just want to stop this simplistic notion GOP/Tory = bad, Labour/Democrat = Good, more government = good. There are false prophets. I do not think anyone here has made such a simplistic assertion. We have all read history books, I trust. In the UK we live in a surveillance state which is becoming a police state. On average 300 cameras will catch your image a day. Then there's RIPA giving anyone in government (even a nosy local council worker) to look at your bank balance, tap your phone, monitor your movements and go through your bin. Indeed. Just because personal freedom increased in the last several decades that does not mean the change is permanent. The tide can flow the other way -- as it has. Repressive new laws will always be passed. New technologies such as the ability to capture DNA will be used in repressive ways. New laws governing the Internet and other new technology will sometimes be unfair. It is complicated. Some of these repressive laws are probably needed. We must also give corporations great power over our lives. In order to stop credit card fraud, we must give credit card companies minute to minute information about where we are and what we are doing. Is it worth the tradeoff, and the threat to liberty? It is hard to say. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Are you sure? From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Any law can be repealed. The public are infantilised, not talk how to think, how to have any dignity for themselves, putty infinitely mouldable in the hands of the elite. Jed, a lie's a lie. A pig with its nose in the trough is just a greedy tame pig.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:10 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: I guess you'd make a great Chinese citizen. Frankly I do not have any idea what you mean or the relevance of the comment. For your information, recognizing how a government operates does not mean that I wish for this behavior to continue. However, I do get testy when people complain and suggest cures without the slightest idea what disease is being treated. If you were a doctor, your patient would have died long ago. Ed -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 19:48 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. I suppose it does to someone who believes in the ideal function of government. However, if you examine the actual behavior, you will find that the number of laws always grow in number and complexity. The tax laws are a good example. This may not be what people want to hear but it is a fact. Some of this growth takes placed because conditions change and new laws are required to control the technology. At the same time, industry works very hard to protect and enlarge its self interest. Most people have no idea what laws and rules exist until they are subjected to the legal system. In addition, the government works hard to hide many laws that benefit certain industries or individuals. Personally, I would rather accept how the system actually operates rather than be surprised because I have an ideal understanding of what I wish were true. Ed Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar- none. It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't worship them anymore in church or on thrones. This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or government with Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating going on. * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26
Re: [Vo]:Impeachment
I doubt that any argument would change your mind, Thomas. Given your expressed values, I expect you voted for Bush. Are you happy with this vote? Has your life improved? If it has, then you are one of the few lucky people who would certainly like the good times to continue. If not, why would you want to make the same mistake? Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:01 PM, thomas malloy wrote: Jed Rothwell posted; Meanwhile, I am sorry to report that McCain has pulled dead even with Obama in the polls. See: http://gallup.com/home.aspx http://webmail.usfamily.net/web/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgallup.com%2Fhome.aspx Yes!! I'm going to put my McCain sign on my house, along with the Country First sign. If Obama cannot win in these circumstances, I fear he cannot win at all. If the Demcrats had nominated someone decient, a fiscally conservative prolife candidate, they'd wind by a landslide. But no, they had to nominate the man with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. If the abortion doesn't kill the baby, let it lie on the counter till it does die. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
From Remi: Was it Gene Hackman in a film I can't remember with this line You're either police or little people. I believe you are referring to a memorable quote from the famous film, Blad Runner with Harrison Ford as Deckard. See: Memorable quotes for Blade Runner: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/quotes Deckard: [getting up to leave] I was quit when I come in here, Bryant, I'm twice as quit now. Bryant: Stop right where you are! You know the score, pal. You're not cop, you're little people! [Deckard stops at the door] Deckard: No choice, huh? Bryant: [smiles] No choice, pal. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Not from torture or mind control though. -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you were a doctor, your patient would have died long ago. Ed -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 19:48 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. I suppose it does to someone who believes in the ideal function of government. However, if you examine the actual behavior, you will find that the number of laws always grow in number and complexity. The tax laws are a good example. This may not be what people want to hear but it is a fact. Some of this growth takes placed because conditions change and new laws are required to control the technology. At the same time, industry works very hard to protect and enlarge its self interest. Most people have no idea what laws and rules exist until they are subjected to the legal system. In addition, the government works hard to hide many laws that benefit certain industries or individuals. Personally, I would rather accept how the system actually operates rather than be surprised because I have an ideal understanding of what I wish were true. Ed Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar- none. It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't worship them anymore in church or on thrones. This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or government with Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating going on. * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and Investigative Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find if I was a lawyer and constitutional expert. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do governments vote themselves less power? I'm in agreement about corporations. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external forces on the market themselves. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not convinced about the need for more government. It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort truth (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos vetoed reform). It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the character of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the right. The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A plague on both their houses! The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was written. New energy will empower people to self-reliance. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout - Original Message ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - ... from the net, a little
RE: [Vo]:Impeachment
Ed, A McCain/Palin administration does not represent a continuation. What you wanna do? Change the name of the country too? -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Impeachment I doubt that any argument would change your mind, Thomas. Given your expressed values, I expect you voted for Bush. Are you happy with this vote? Has your life improved? If it has, then you are one of the few lucky people who would certainly like the good times to continue. If not, why would you want to make the same mistake? Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:01 PM, thomas malloy wrote: Jed Rothwell posted; Meanwhile, I am sorry to report that McCain has pulled dead even with Obama in the polls. See: http://gallup.com/home.aspx http://webmail.usfamily.net/web/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgallup.com %2Fhome.aspx Yes!! I'm going to put my McCain sign on my house, along with the Country First sign. If Obama cannot win in these circumstances, I fear he cannot win at all. If the Demcrats had nominated someone decient, a fiscally conservative prolife candidate, they'd wind by a landslide. But no, they had to nominate the man with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. If the abortion doesn't kill the baby, let it lie on the counter till it does die. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: Are you sure? Yes, I have read history, and lived through it, and I am sure things were much worse in the past. I am also sure they can get worse again. The public are infantilised, not talk how to think, how to have any dignity for themselves, putty infinitely mouldable in the hands of the elite. Much less today than it was in the 1930s, or the 1830s. Look at movies back when the US Motion Picture Production Codes were in effect! Talk about infantilization. No movie theater in the US would show a movie in which married couples slept in the same bed or evildoers did not get their comeuppance by the last reel. Quoting Wikipedia, the The Production Code enumerated three General Principles as follows: 1. No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin. 2. Correct standards of life, subject only to the requirements of drama and entertainment, shall be presented. 3. Law, natural or human, shall not be ridiculed, nor shall sympathy be created for its violation. Some specifics: The ridicule of religion was forbidden, and ministers of religion were not to be represented as comic characters or villains. References to alleged sex perversion (such as homosexuality) and venereal disease were forbidden, as were depictions of childbirth. . . . Can you imagine trying to pass a law enforcing that today? There were countless other laws of this nature on the books until the 1960s. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Impeachment
On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:36 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed, A McCain/Palin administration does not represent a continuation. I wish you were right about this opinion. However, the easily verified facts say that you are not right. Of course, any fact can be ignored if you insist on keeping an opinion. However, in my life, I have found this approach does not work very well. How has this approach worked out for you? Ed What you wanna do? Change the name of the country too? -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Impeachment I doubt that any argument would change your mind, Thomas. Given your expressed values, I expect you voted for Bush. Are you happy with this vote? Has your life improved? If it has, then you are one of the few lucky people who would certainly like the good times to continue. If not, why would you want to make the same mistake? Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:01 PM, thomas malloy wrote: Jed Rothwell posted; Meanwhile, I am sorry to report that McCain has pulled dead even with Obama in the polls. See: http://gallup.com/home.aspx http://webmail.usfamily.net/web/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgallup.com %2Fhome.aspx Yes!! I'm going to put my McCain sign on my house, along with the Country First sign. If Obama cannot win in these circumstances, I fear he cannot win at all. If the Demcrats had nominated someone decient, a fiscally conservative prolife candidate, they'd wind by a landslide. But no, they had to nominate the man with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. If the abortion doesn't kill the baby, let it lie on the counter till it does die. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
How does the liberal code of movie production run, like this? 1) Aim low then lower still. Hate you country, let the bad win, let the good suffer. Bamboozle, perplex. 2) Incorrect standards of life will be seen as thought provoking: man married to sister both marrying a sheep. Vegan cats. 3) Law is relative. Subject to change at short notice, always increasing, obscure - it'll keep you guessing and anything WE SAY IT IS. For natural law see (2). -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:37 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Remi Cornwall wrote: Are you sure? Yes, I have read history, and lived through it, and I am sure things were much worse in the past. I am also sure they can get worse again. The public are infantilised, not talk how to think, how to have any dignity for themselves, putty infinitely mouldable in the hands of the elite. Much less today than it was in the 1930s, or the 1830s. Look at movies back when the US Motion Picture Production Codes were in effect! Talk about infantilization. No movie theater in the US would show a movie in which married couples slept in the same bed or evildoers did not get their comeuppance by the last reel. Quoting Wikipedia, the The Production Code enumerated three General Principles as follows: 1. No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin. 2. Correct standards of life, subject only to the requirements of drama and entertainment, shall be presented. 3. Law, natural or human, shall not be ridiculed, nor shall sympathy be created for its violation. Some specifics: The ridicule of religion was forbidden, and ministers of religion were not to be represented as comic characters or villains. References to alleged sex perversion (such as homosexuality) and venereal disease were forbidden, as were depictions of childbirth. . . . Can you imagine trying to pass a law enforcing that today? There were countless other laws of this nature on the books until the 1960s. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:H2 Storage
From Mike Carrell: From: Jones Beene Although the problems of any large country like the USA moving to a hydrogen economy are too severe to even consider, at least without many breakthroughs in a number of fields - and in all likelihood we cannot afford H2 as even a partial solution for transportation fuel with present technology, there is one bit of bright news in hydrogen storage - titanium. MC: Jones is forgetting BlackLight Power, about which he wrote a slightly negative artice for New Energy Times. BLP has made a significant breakthrough with its solid fuel technology and is now moving toward commercialization with a utility scale reactor and local hydrogen generators for hydrogen-converted cars. These are a couple of years away yet, but the basic technology is in place. Mike Carrell Yet ANOTHER topic worthy of debate on vortex while we wait for new and interesting AE developments to surface. There does seems to have been a dearth of interesting AE news lately. This has been obvious by the number of off topic discussions running rampant on this discussion list. Of course, I'm guilty as charged too, having contributed my own two-cents to the OT god. But then, we do have an election less than two months away, so it's understandable that there have been distractions and increased literary friction. ;-) Mills' solid fuel technology is indeed an interesting topic. There has been occasionally interesting discussion on how challenging (difficult) it is likely be to commercialize the process. Mills, of course, being the ever-optimist spokesperson for BLP sez, 12 - 18 months tops. I suspect few on this group are as optimistic. I suspect few here believe BLP will be succeed in constructing a real prototype, one that presumably would silence his many critics forever, utterly and profoundly, within 12 - 18 months. Nevertheless, I remain guardedly optimistic. My prediction: Maybe within five years - if BLP is lucky. I do agree with Mr. Carrell on the point that I'm sure BLP has or is in the process of hiring a lot of smart people possessing sufficient savvy to complete the daunting task. Hopefully we in the peanut gallery will continue receiving encouraging progress reports along the way. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:Impeachment
No opinions in science Ed. Won't keep banging on about the same thing if it's leading nowhere. -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:44 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Impeachment On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:36 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: Ed, A McCain/Palin administration does not represent a continuation. I wish you were right about this opinion. However, the easily verified facts say that you are not right. Of course, any fact can be ignored if you insist on keeping an opinion. However, in my life, I have found this approach does not work very well. How has this approach worked out for you? Ed What you wanna do? Change the name of the country too? -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:27 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:Impeachment I doubt that any argument would change your mind, Thomas. Given your expressed values, I expect you voted for Bush. Are you happy with this vote? Has your life improved? If it has, then you are one of the few lucky people who would certainly like the good times to continue. If not, why would you want to make the same mistake? Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:01 PM, thomas malloy wrote: Jed Rothwell posted; Meanwhile, I am sorry to report that McCain has pulled dead even with Obama in the polls. See: http://gallup.com/home.aspx http://webmail.usfamily.net/web/services/go.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgallup.com %2Fhome.aspx Yes!! I'm going to put my McCain sign on my house, along with the Country First sign. If Obama cannot win in these circumstances, I fear he cannot win at all. If the Demcrats had nominated someone decient, a fiscally conservative prolife candidate, they'd wind by a landslide. But no, they had to nominate the man with the most liberal voting record in the Senate. If the abortion doesn't kill the baby, let it lie on the counter till it does die. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:H2 Storage
- Original Message Mike BLP has made a significant breakthrough with its solid fuel technology and is now moving toward commercialization with a utility scale reactor and local hydrogen generators for hydrogen-converted cars. These are a couple of years away yet, but the basic technology is in place. Mike, How do you know this? I would like to believe it, as alwasy - and I could readily believe it ***IF*** you or anyone else who is trustworthy had personally witnessed it, taken independent measurements over and could honestly vouch for it as being robust. ... but alas... it appears you are quoting solely from BLP press releases. As always. And all that I see in the new PR is that they the company is running short of funds once again, and desperately needs investment capital; and furthermore that this episode sounds very much like a rerun of the previous Capstone Turbine claims and the reverse gyrotron claims, both of which unfounded claims preceded earlier rounds of financing - and this is far more like the real scenario than anything which is a couple of years away yet ... As far as actually planning for this at the National level - it is currently a no-show. Again, I am not negative at all - of the basic idea and concept of the hydrino - and I believe that the BLP lab results are real, and are similar to what is happening in the LENR field; but Mills has consistently balked when it comes to delivering a functional prototype - and there is nothing to show that this one is an exception to that long history of disappointment. Jones
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
From Remi: How does the liberal code of movie production run, like this? 1) Aim low then lower still. Hate you country, let the bad win, let the good suffer. Bamboozle, perplex. 2) Incorrect standards of life will be seen as thought provoking: man married to sister both marrying a sheep. Vegan cats. 3) Law is relative. Subject to change at short notice, always increasing, obscure - it'll keep you guessing and anything WE SAY IT IS. For natural law see (2). Your honor, the prosecution is once again leading the peanut gallery! Sustained. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
FW: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
-Original Message- From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:17 PM To: 'vortex-l@eskimo.com' Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Could we say that most of the problems with the US government can be traced to areas where it extends beyond its constitutional limits? Jeff
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: How does the liberal code of movie production run, like this? 1) Aim low then lower still. Hate you country, let the bad win, let the good suffer. Bamboozle, perplex. 2) Incorrect standards of life will be seen as thought provoking: man married to sister both marrying a sheep. Vegan cats. . . . Very funny. I would point out a few things that you seem to be missing: 1. The laws I quoted were actually on the books and enforced by the government, for decades. You seem to have the romantic notion that in the past people were free and now they are hemmed in. Did you know about the Production Codes? Did you notice that movies made before 1968 were uniform and different from ones made today? Have your read books, novels and newspapers from the past? You should. It will give you better perspective on the present. 2. I am a liberal and my family has been liberal since we came to North America sometime in the 17th or 18th century (presumable from Rothwell, England via the Isle of Wight.) We do not believe in such things and we never have. You seem to have the notion that anything you despise or find ridiculous is liberal. This is silly. 3. The U.S. is preeminently a liberal country; the constitution and government even more than the people in a sense, because when people are shown the Bill of Rights from the Constitution they often declare these rights un-American. I was at a CNN conference in the late 1990s, when blogging and the Internet were becoming hot topics. Some mainstream journalists were aghast that ordinary people are allowed to publish news without a license as one of them put it. - Jed
Re: FW: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
i would think many of the issues i have with it are with constitution rights given to things that dont deserve them. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Jeff Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:17 PM To: 'vortex-l@eskimo.com' Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Could we say that most of the problems with the US government can be traced to areas where it extends beyond its constitutional limits? Jeff
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
OrionWorks wrote: From Remi: Was it Gene Hackman in a film I can't remember with this line You're either police or little people. I believe you are referring to a memorable quote from the famous film, Blad Runner with Harrison Ford as Deckard. See: Memorable quotes for Blade Runner: Interesting you should mention Blade Runner in the context of a discussion which is intermixed with other threads containing a lot of apocalyptic talk about global warming, mass extinctions, and, by implication, what may or may not survive the current round of changes to the biosphere. We haven't mentioned bees recently, but they figured indirectly in Blade Runner. As you may recall, Blade Runner was based on the Philip Dick novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. That was one his more obscure novels (actually, most of his books could be described that way). An interesting detail in the novel which I don't think they emphasized in the film was that *all* animal life on Earth had apparently died off, except for humans. Quite aside from any practical consequences, this had such a major psychological impact on people that an entire industry had grown up, producing *robot* animals to take the place of the missing real animals. In the book, at one point the protagonist tests a woman to determine whether she's a real human, or an android. The test consisted of a series of questions. The most significant one, buried in the list, was, If a bee landed on your arm, what would you do? She responded, Swat it! which immediately pegged her as an android, because no true human would ever have given such an answer -- bees were too precious. The loss of the animals was never explained, as far as I can recall. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/quotes Deckard: [getting up to leave] I was quit when I come in here, Bryant, I'm twice as quit now. Bryant: Stop right where you are! You know the score, pal. You're not cop, you're little people! [Deckard stops at the door] Deckard: No choice, huh? Bryant: [smiles] No choice, pal. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Actually, only the Supreme Court can answer this question and they show no interest in doing so. The cause of the problem is obvious to anyone who has looked at reality. Many mistakes were made, but each has been identified and attempts will be made to apply a correction. Of course, the corrections will be imperfect because of the required compromises, but they will be put in place no matter who is elected. The only issue of this electron is how will the next mistake be handled? The next mistake is now being created by the structure of the bailout. The next president will have runaway inflation and high interest rates. Who do you think will handle this problem to your benefit? Ed On Sep 26, 2008, at 2:10 PM, Jeff Fink wrote: -Original Message- From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:17 PM To: 'vortex-l@eskimo.com' Subject: RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Could we say that most of the problems with the US government can be traced to areas where it extends beyond its constitutional limits? Jeff
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
I seem to recall that it wasnt that a human wouldn't swat it, its that a human wouldnt know waht a bee was. I could be wrong. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OrionWorks wrote: From Remi: Was it Gene Hackman in a film I can't remember with this line You're either police or little people. I believe you are referring to a memorable quote from the famous film, Blad Runner with Harrison Ford as Deckard. See: Memorable quotes for Blade Runner: Interesting you should mention Blade Runner in the context of a discussion which is intermixed with other threads containing a lot of apocalyptic talk about global warming, mass extinctions, and, by implication, what may or may not survive the current round of changes to the biosphere. We haven't mentioned bees recently, but they figured indirectly in Blade Runner. As you may recall, Blade Runner was based on the Philip Dick novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. That was one his more obscure novels (actually, most of his books could be described that way). An interesting detail in the novel which I don't think they emphasized in the film was that *all* animal life on Earth had apparently died off, except for humans. Quite aside from any practical consequences, this had such a major psychological impact on people that an entire industry had grown up, producing *robot* animals to take the place of the missing real animals. In the book, at one point the protagonist tests a woman to determine whether she's a real human, or an android. The test consisted of a series of questions. The most significant one, buried in the list, was, If a bee landed on your arm, what would you do? She responded, Swat it! which immediately pegged her as an android, because no true human would ever have given such an answer -- bees were too precious. The loss of the animals was never explained, as far as I can recall. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/quotes Deckard: [getting up to leave] I was quit when I come in here, Bryant, I'm twice as quit now. Bryant: Stop right where you are! You know the score, pal. You're not cop, you're little people! [Deckard stops at the door] Deckard: No choice, huh? Bryant: [smiles] No choice, pal. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Wow! Team America on the TV. See ya. -Original Message- From: OrionWorks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 20:58 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout From Remi: How does the liberal code of movie production run, like this? 1) Aim low then lower still. Hate you country, let the bad win, let the good suffer. Bamboozle, perplex. 2) Incorrect standards of life will be seen as thought provoking: man married to sister both marrying a sheep. Vegan cats. 3) Law is relative. Subject to change at short notice, always increasing, obscure - it'll keep you guessing and anything WE SAY IT IS. For natural law see (2). Your honor, the prosecution is once again leading the peanut gallery! Sustained. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: FW: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Jeff Fink wrote: Could we say that most of the problems with the US government can be traced to areas where it extends beyond its constitutional limits? I would go along with that. It is hard to say whether it is most or many or some of the most serious but that surely is a problem. The other big problem in this administration has been government officials not doing their job, and not enforcing the laws regulations they are supposed to enforce. Katrina was a prime example, and so is the present market meltdown. The government has functioned well for 200 years so I am sure it can work. But the present administrators are incompetent and some of them believe that government is the problem so they are not motivated to do a good job. Big government or activist government per se is not at all unconstitutional in my opinion. That is like saying that big corporations are not compatible with democracy. Big or little is not the issue, as long as they are forced to follow the rules and do our bidding. We should have whatever size of government we need to deal with the situation we happen to be faced with at present. I do not think that present-day technology such as highways, air transportation, the Internet or fossil fuel could exist without a strong activist government. We are still living in the era of large-scale, centralized, standardized, big-iron industrial civilization, although anyone can see that is gradually fading. I would rather have our technology than laissez-faire government. Future technology probably will allow decentralized, weaker government. As I mentioned, we also need big powerful corporations such as credit card companies. They are a mixed blessing. We need big government to offset the power of these giant corporations. Corporations unchecked by government have a pronounced propensity to steal everything that is not nailed down, as we saw in the Enron episode and today's financial collapse. We needed big government for WWII and the Cold War and probably to end global warming and deal with some other problems now, but in a few hundred years it may be better to have a small, weak government such as we had before 1860 or in the late 19th century. Nowadays, people know who the president is. From 1890 to the 1920s, every kid in town knew who the mayor and aldermen were, but a lot of them did not know or care who the president was. I expect it will be similar in the future. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
leaking pen wrote: I seem to recall that it wasnt that a human wouldn't swat it, its that a human wouldnt know waht a bee was. That wasn't the point of the test, at least in the book -- in fact Deckard may even have explained to her what a bee was when the question came up; I'm no longer sure. Her (alleged) father, as I recall, was an animal-robot manufacturer, in any case, so she could easily have known a lot more about what animals had existed than most folks. The same scene existed in the movie but it was played out a little differently; it had to be, since there was no voiceover, and it was the narrator in the book who tipped us off as to what was going on with the test. Folks generally knew what the insects were -- or had been -- and in fact there were *robot* bugs running around in the corners of the book. I recall, in particular, a robot spider living on the stairwell of the apartment complex. Humans were more or less familiar with the whole array of extinct animal life, and people saved their nickels to buy robot animals to enrich their lives (or gain status or whatever). The electric sheep in the title were robots, of course. The protagonist's landlord, I think it was, had an electric goat at one point, and kept it on the (flat) roof of the apartment building. When we see the home of the woman/android, it's a robot manufacturer, and among other little touches there's a cage containing some apparently live ... but actually robot ... owls. (Or maybe they're not robots; one is always left wondering.) The electric goat is pushed off the roof by an android, by the way, in another demonstration of the relative coldness of the androids; a normal human would have been very unlikely to do that, even though the goat was only a robot. (And anyway, why should an android, provenance either Mars or an Earth-side factory, know any better than an Earth-Human what a bee was?) I could be wrong. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OrionWorks wrote: From Remi: Was it Gene Hackman in a film I can't remember with this line You're either police or little people. I believe you are referring to a memorable quote from the famous film, Blad Runner with Harrison Ford as Deckard. See: Memorable quotes for Blade Runner: Interesting you should mention Blade Runner in the context of a discussion which is intermixed with other threads containing a lot of apocalyptic talk about global warming, mass extinctions, and, by implication, what may or may not survive the current round of changes to the biosphere. We haven't mentioned bees recently, but they figured indirectly in Blade Runner. As you may recall, Blade Runner was based on the Philip Dick novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. That was one his more obscure novels (actually, most of his books could be described that way). An interesting detail in the novel which I don't think they emphasized in the film was that *all* animal life on Earth had apparently died off, except for humans. Quite aside from any practical consequences, this had such a major psychological impact on people that an entire industry had grown up, producing *robot* animals to take the place of the missing real animals. In the book, at one point the protagonist tests a woman to determine whether she's a real human, or an android. The test consisted of a series of questions. The most significant one, buried in the list, was, If a bee landed on your arm, what would you do? She responded, Swat it! which immediately pegged her as an android, because no true human would ever have given such an answer -- bees were too precious. The loss of the animals was never explained, as far as I can recall. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/quotes Deckard: [getting up to leave] I was quit when I come in here, Bryant, I'm twice as quit now. Bryant: Stop right where you are! You know the score, pal. You're not cop, you're little people! [Deckard stops at the door] Deckard: No choice, huh? Bryant: [smiles] No choice, pal. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
-Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 4:25 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Actually, only the Supreme Court can answer this question and they show no interest in doing so. The cause of the problem is obvious to anyone who has looked at reality. Many mistakes were made, but each has been identified and attempts will be made to apply a correction. Of course, the corrections will be imperfect because of the required compromises, but they will be put in place no matter who is elected. The only issue of this electron is how will the next mistake be handled? The next mistake is now being created by the structure of the bailout. The next president will have runaway inflation and high interest rates. Who do you think will handle this problem to your benefit? Ed Right now we have inflation running at approximately 10% annual rate and savings accounts paying around 1 1/2% for a net loss of 8 1/2%. On top of that we must pay income tax on the 1 1/2%. Part of Obama's plan to balance the budget is to subject that 1 1/2% to social security payments as well! It is part of his plan to redistribute the wealth. Inflation is a tax, and it loots the savers. The stock market is too scary to mess with. I-bonds are paying 0% interest right now, but even at that, they might be the best investment out there. The majority of people endeavor to conduct their lives in such a manner so as not to be a burden to others. They are the targets of this redistribution. Some poor people seek jobs while others milk the system. If the job creators are plundered by the government, where will the jobs come from? When the haves are reduced to havenots, we will all be losers. We cannot advance the economy by punishing the hard working successful. Jeff
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
On Sep 26, 2008, at 3:53 PM, Jeff Fink wrote: -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 4:25 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout Actually, only the Supreme Court can answer this question and they show no interest in doing so. The cause of the problem is obvious to anyone who has looked at reality. Many mistakes were made, but each has been identified and attempts will be made to apply a correction. Of course, the corrections will be imperfect because of the required compromises, but they will be put in place no matter who is elected. The only issue of this electron is how will the next mistake be handled? The next mistake is now being created by the structure of the bailout. The next president will have runaway inflation and high interest rates. Who do you think will handle this problem to your benefit? Ed Right now we have inflation running at approximately 10% annual rate and savings accounts paying around 1 1/2% for a net loss of 8 1/2%. On top of that we must pay income tax on the 1 1/2%. Part of Obama's plan to balance the budget is to subject that 1 1/2% to social security payments as well! It is part of his plan to redistribute the wealth. Inflation is a tax, and it loots the savers. The stock market is too scary to mess with. I- bonds are paying 0% interest right now, but even at that, they might be the best investment out there. The majority of people endeavor to conduct their lives in such a manner so as not to be a burden to others. They are the targets of this redistribution. Some poor people seek jobs while others milk the system. If the job creators are plundered by the government, where will the jobs come from? When the haves are reduced to havenots, we will all be losers. We cannot advance the economy by punishing the hard working successful. Jeff Jeff, Obama and the Democrats did not create this situation. The Republicans ran up the national debt, which added to inflation and they kept interest rates low to encourage the financial system to be more profitable. They also reduced oversight on the financial system so that it could be more profitable. Of course, the conservatives and the opposition party should have fought harder against the Bush faction. Now everyone has suddendly seen the light, and each side is trying to look good while solving the problem consistent with own self- interest. The Bush bunch, who brought us Iraq, now has come up with an equally incompetent plan, which fortunately is being resisted. No matter what is done, the new president will have limited options and we all will suffer. Do you want an intelligent person who analyzes a problem based on facts or a person that shoots from the hip based on short term considerations? Do you want a person who will last 4 years or someone who will allow Palin to take charge? Of course, the different known approaches to the present problem need to be considered. Have you compared the McCain plan to the Obama plan? We can't afford another mistake as was made when Bush was elected. Ed
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Can't argue with that. I just want to know why when GOP representatives are on TV that they don't give more history about how this mess came about. Say it loud, say it proud, the democrats vetoed reform in 2003 and took money from lobbyists. They are like tamed pigs in the trough. In everything they say replace free market or corporation with Jew and government with Reich and the braying, stirred-up public as the dupes at a Nuremberg rally and see the parallels. They instigated this crisis. They now want to scapegoat. There is a leftwing conspiracy and non-Americans have to go routing around for the truth. The news is all one-sided. It's the usual US bashing, ungrateful, bailed out children carping at the grown-ups. Bite the hand that feeds. Goodnight. Sleep well. -Original Message- From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Right now we have inflation running at approximately 10% annual rate and savings accounts paying around 1 1/2% for a net loss of 8 1/2%. On top of that we must pay income tax on the 1 1/2%. Part of Obama's plan to balance the budget is to subject that 1 1/2% to social security payments as well! It is part of his plan to redistribute the wealth. Inflation is a tax, and it loots the savers. The stock market is too scary to mess with. I-bonds are paying 0% interest right now, but even at that, they might be the best investment out there. The majority of people endeavor to conduct their lives in such a manner so as not to be a burden to others. They are the targets of this redistribution. Some poor people seek jobs while others milk the system. If the job creators are plundered by the government, where will the jobs come from? When the haves are reduced to havenots, we will all be losers. We cannot advance the economy by punishing the hard working successful. Jeff
Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit
But the pool players won't fall over simply because you choose the ball as your frame of reference throughout the process. You have to choose a frame a reference which is inertial (at rest or moving with constant velocity) throughout the entire process, i.e. before, during and after the collision. Anyway this is not really where I wanted to end up because I find myself in agreement with newtonian relativity. lol It is the ahistorical aspect of newtonian relativity which bothers me. When I stand on shore and see a ship sail by, and I know that it was set in motion by the wind. Also a person on the ship knows the shore was not set in motion by the wind. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit if you are choosing that ball as a frame of refference, then that would be true. The point of relativity is that there is no central frame of refference, just what you choose. its not conceit, its reality. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is true but that is not what I mean. Imagine you are the ball and you are resting wrt to the table and the earth. A cue or another ball hits you so you move at 1 m/s wrt to the table. Would you be so self-centred as to claim you are still resting, and that the table and the earth are now moving under you at 1 m/s? If such a conceit were true the pool players standing around the table would have been flung off their feet as the earth abruptly accelerated under them from 0 m/s to 1 m/s. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit Yes. It is more the opposite, but every step you take, you push the Earth, and she pushes back at you. The Earth pushes a hell of a lot harder, but you DO have an effect on the motion of the Earth, however infintesimal, with each step. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 11:18 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit OrionWorks wrote: I bet this device look familiar to a few vorts! See: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/09/chinese-buildin.html Uh -- not me; looks sort of like an antique picture tube, maybe, but I don't recognize it. I notice Emdrive hasn't gotten as far as running a spell checker over their front page, which doesn't automatically fill one with confidence. From the description, it appears to be a microwave oven. Surprising that they claim it will fly. I had one other comment on the website. On the theory page, they say: ... Einstein's Special Law of Relativity in which separate frames of reference have to be applied at velocities approaching the speed of light. This is absolutely false. SR does *not* require that you must apply separate frames of reference when approaching the speed of light. In fact any analysis which relies on total momentum or energy *must* be carried out entirely within a *single* reference frame or else you'll end up with nonsensical results (just as they have apparently done here). In the FAQs they say: Thus the system of EM wave and waveguide can be regarded as an open system, with the EM wave and the waveguide having separate frames of reference. This is complete nonsense. The reference frame chosen is based on what makes it easiest to solve a particular problem. There's nothing magical about relativity theory here, nor is there any mystical significance to the term reference frame; *exactly* the same concept exists in ordinary Newtonian mechanics. When a pool player strikes a ball, in the frame of the table, the cue and the player's arm have significant momentum just before the ball is hit. Afterwards, the table, player, and cue have zero momentum in the *table's* reference frame. And yet, the ball has zero momentum in the *ball's* reference frame, too! So, where did the momentum go? Answer: you need to do the momentum budget using a *single* frame, not a different frame for each physical object! (But you get to pick which frame to use.) I have difficulty even accepting newtonian relativity. Do you think by a flick of the wrist the mass of the table (and the earth!) have gone from being at rest wrt to the cue ball, to being in motion wrt to the cue ball? Harry
Re: [Vo]:Google Project 10^100
In reply to Taylor J. Smith's message of Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:41:57 +: Hi Jack, [snip] I have chosen a different approach. Make a guess at the mechanism, and assume it is correct. Then optimize a design based upon the guess. Build the design. If the guess was correct, it will pay off. If not, then little is lost. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Hi Robin, I want to send you $1000 US for your project, no strings. Please post instructions. Thanks, Jack Smith That's very generous of you, but I'm afraid it wouldn't make any difference, and besides, I'm not looking for handouts. What I am looking for is a genuine partnership, where all involved benefit from the resultant work. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Jeff Fink wrote: Part of Obama's plan to balance the budget is to subject that 1 1/2% to social security payments as well! It is part of his plan to redistribute the wealth. . . . The majority of people endeavor to conduct their lives in such a manner so as not to be a burden to others. They are the targets of this redistribution. Over the past eight years the wealth of the United States has been redistributed to a larger extent than ever before in our history. Redistributed upward, that is, by Republican tax policy and their failure to regulate markets properly. The gap between the rich and the poor has not been this large since 1929, and it is that gap -- and the lack of purchasing power -- that causes depressions. In an industrial society, the people who make things must have enough money to buy those things. From 1945 until the late 90s, the US, the EU Japan and the rest of the developed world had policies of redistributing wealth downward, with higher taxes on wealthy people. This worked well. Some wealthy people complained, but most wealthy people realize that it is better for them to pay a higher percent of their income if it means we can all live in a prosperous, happy, stable society. After the Great Depression we have never been in serious danger. Under Democratic administrations the economy has always grown faster and more equitably than Republican administrations, but both parties have maintained the responsible, pragmatic approach. Call it socialism if you will, but it worked splendidly 70 years, there is no reason to think it will stop working. It is a hybrid capitalist-socialist system, with some strengths and weaknesses from both. I am a conservative pragmatist so I favor doing what works, with adjustments as needed, as technology and conditions change. Who cares if it is not pure capitalism? It works. In 2000 Bush threw our system out, abandoned wealth distribution and regulations, and now we are back to where we started in 1929! Some poor people seek jobs while others milk the system. Exactly right! And who has milked the system? Wall Street and big banks! Now they want $700 billion more. Perhaps you are thinking of welfare cheats but the banks have stolen more than all the welfare cheats in history. If the job creators are plundered by the government, where will the jobs come from? When the haves are reduced to havenots, we will all be losers. We cannot advance the economy by punishing the hard working successful. That is correct. That is why we must reward working class and middle class people, and take from the wealthy. Ordinary working people are the ones who create wealth: not speculators on Wall Street; not monopolists such as Bill Gates; not corporate CEOs who earn $200 million per year; not the shysters at Enron and Halliburton; and certainly not people who drag the country into unnecessary wars and starve the poor and middle class while rewarding wealthy people. You so-called conservatives have the right instincts but your facts are upside down. Democrats such as Clinton and Obama preserve our system and reward work. Bush is the one who has cost us trillions of dollars. This is the wrong season for you or McCain to criticize the hybrid modern economy, or rail about socialism. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit
but, wind patterns DO alter rotation, to a degree. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the pool players won't fall over simply because you choose the ball as your frame of reference throughout the process. You have to choose a frame a reference which is inertial (at rest or moving with constant velocity) throughout the entire process, i.e. before, during and after the collision. Anyway this is not really where I wanted to end up because I find myself in agreement with newtonian relativity. lol It is the ahistorical aspect of newtonian relativity which bothers me. When I stand on shore and see a ship sail by, and I know that it was set in motion by the wind. Also a person on the ship knows the shore was not set in motion by the wind. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit if you are choosing that ball as a frame of refference, then that would be true. The point of relativity is that there is no central frame of refference, just what you choose. its not conceit, its reality. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is true but that is not what I mean. Imagine you are the ball and you are resting wrt to the table and the earth. A cue or another ball hits you so you move at 1 m/s wrt to the table. Would you be so self-centred as to claim you are still resting, and that the table and the earth are now moving under you at 1 m/s? If such a conceit were true the pool players standing around the table would have been flung off their feet as the earth abruptly accelerated under them from 0 m/s to 1 m/s. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit Yes. It is more the opposite, but every step you take, you push the Earth, and she pushes back at you. The Earth pushes a hell of a lot harder, but you DO have an effect on the motion of the Earth, however infintesimal, with each step. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 11:18 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit OrionWorks wrote: I bet this device look familiar to a few vorts! See: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/09/chinese-buildin.html Uh -- not me; looks sort of like an antique picture tube, maybe, but I don't recognize it. I notice Emdrive hasn't gotten as far as running a spell checker over their front page, which doesn't automatically fill one with confidence. From the description, it appears to be a microwave oven. Surprising that they claim it will fly. I had one other comment on the website. On the theory page, they say: ... Einstein's Special Law of Relativity in which separate frames of reference have to be applied at velocities approaching the speed of light. This is absolutely false. SR does *not* require that you must apply separate frames of reference when approaching the speed of light. In fact any analysis which relies on total momentum or energy *must* be carried out entirely within a *single* reference frame or else you'll end up with nonsensical results (just as they have apparently done here). In the FAQs they say: Thus the system of EM wave and waveguide can be regarded as an open system, with the EM wave and the waveguide having separate frames of reference. This is complete nonsense. The reference frame chosen is based on what makes it easiest to solve a particular problem. There's nothing magical about relativity theory here, nor is there any mystical significance to the term reference frame; *exactly* the same concept exists in ordinary Newtonian mechanics. When a pool player strikes a ball, in the frame of the table, the cue and the player's arm have significant momentum just before the ball is hit. Afterwards, the table, player, and cue have zero momentum in the *table's* reference frame. And yet, the ball has zero momentum in the *ball's* reference frame, too! So, where did the momentum go? Answer: you need to do the momentum budget using a *single* frame, not a different frame for each physical object! (But you get to pick which frame to use.) I have difficulty even accepting newtonian relativity. Do you think by a flick of the wrist the mass of the table (and the earth!) have gone from being at rest wrt to the cue ball, to being in motion wrt to the cue ball? Harry
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Remi Cornwall wrote: I just want to know why when GOP representatives are on TV that they don't give more history about how this mess came about. Say it loud, say it proud, the democrats vetoed reform in 2003 You seem to be confused about history, or the U.S. system. The Republicans had a large majority in 2003. The Democrats could not veto anything. (Technically, only the President can veto a bill in the U.S. But anyway, in Congress, in 2003, only the Republicans had the numbers to stymie or prevent passage of a bill.) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Tell me, what color is the sky in this fantasy land you live in? Or is it just too many drugs taken at once? On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Remi Cornwall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can't argue with that. I just want to know why when GOP representatives are on TV that they don't give more history about how this mess came about. Say it loud, say it proud, the democrats vetoed reform in 2003 and took money from lobbyists. They are like tamed pigs in the trough. In everything they say replace free market or corporation with Jew and government with Reich and the braying, stirred-up public as the dupes at a Nuremberg rally and see the parallels. They instigated this crisis. They now want to scapegoat. There is a leftwing conspiracy and non-Americans have to go routing around for the truth. The news is all one-sided. It's the usual US bashing, ungrateful, bailed out children carping at the grown-ups. Bite the hand that feeds. Goodnight. Sleep well. -Original Message- From: Jeff Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Right now we have inflation running at approximately 10% annual rate and savings accounts paying around 1 1/2% for a net loss of 8 1/2%. On top of that we must pay income tax on the 1 1/2%. Part of Obama's plan to balance the budget is to subject that 1 1/2% to social security payments as well! It is part of his plan to redistribute the wealth. Inflation is a tax, and it loots the savers. The stock market is too scary to mess with. I-bonds are paying 0% interest right now, but even at that, they might be the best investment out there. The majority of people endeavor to conduct their lives in such a manner so as not to be a burden to others. They are the targets of this redistribution. Some poor people seek jobs while others milk the system. If the job creators are plundered by the government, where will the jobs come from? When the haves are reduced to havenots, we will all be losers. We cannot advance the economy by punishing the hard working successful. Jeff
Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit
that is not what i mean. if the wind made the ship sail at 10mph, the person on the ship knows that neither the wind not anything else causes the land to move past him at 10mph. harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, September 26, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit but, wind patterns DO alter rotation, to a degree. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the pool players won't fall over simply because you choose the ball as your frame of reference throughout the process. You have to choose a frame a reference which is inertial (at rest or moving with constant velocity) throughout the entire process, i.e. before, during and after the collision. Anyway this is not really where I wanted to end up because I find myself in agreement with newtonian relativity. lol It is the ahistorical aspect of newtonian relativity which bothers me. When I stand on shore and see a ship sail by, and I know that it was set in motion by the wind. Also a person on the ship knows the shore was not set in motion by the wind. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit if you are choosing that ball as a frame of refference, then that would be true. The point of relativity is that there is no central frame of refference, just what you choose. its not conceit, its reality. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is true but that is not what I mean. Imagine you are the ball and you are resting wrt to the table and the earth. A cue or another ball hits you so you move at 1 m/s wrt to the table. Would you be so self-centred as to claim you are still resting, and that the table and the earth are now moving under you at 1 m/s? If such a conceit were true the pool players standing around the table would have been flung off their feet as the earth abruptly accelerated under them from 0 m/s to 1 m/s. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit Yes. It is more the opposite, but every step you take, you push the Earth, and she pushes back at you. The Earth pushes a hell of a lot harder, but you DO have an effect on the motion of the Earth, however infintesimal, with each step. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 11:18 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit OrionWorks wrote: I bet this device look familiar to a few vorts! See: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/09/chinese-buildin.html Uh -- not me; looks sort of like an antique picture tube, maybe, but I don't recognize it. I notice Emdrive hasn't gotten as far as running a spell checker over their front page, which doesn't automatically fill one with confidence. From the description, it appears to be a microwave oven. Surprising that they claim it will fly. I had one other comment on the website. On the theory page, they say: ... Einstein's Special Law of Relativity in which separate frames of reference have to be applied at velocities approaching the speed of light. This is absolutely false. SR does *not* require that you must apply separate frames of reference when approaching the speed of light. In fact any analysis which relies on total momentum or energy *must* be carried out entirely within a *single* reference frame or else you'll end up with nonsensical results (just as they have apparently done here). In the FAQs they say: Thus the system of EM wave and waveguide can be regarded as an open system, with the EM wave and the waveguide having separate frames of reference. This is complete nonsense. The reference frame chosen is based on what makes it easiest to solve a particular problem. There's nothing magical about relativity theory here, nor is there any mystical significance to the term reference frame; *exactly* the same concept exists in ordinary Newtonian mechanics. When a pool player strikes a ball, in the frame of the table, the cue and the player's arm have significant momentum just before the ball is hit. Afterwards, the table, player, and cue have zero momentum in the *table's* reference frame. And yet, the ball has zero momentum in the *ball's* reference frame, too! So, where did the momentum go?
Re: [Vo]:Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space
On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:02:06 -0800, you wrote: On Sep 25, 2008, at 7:05 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space By Clara Moskowitz Staff Writer posted: 23 September 2008 12:46 pm ET As if the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy weren't vexing enough, another baffling cosmic puzzle has been discovered. Patches of matter in the universe seem to be moving at very high speeds and in a uniform direction that can't be explained by any of the known gravitational forces in the observable universe. Astronomers are calling the phenomenon dark flow. The stuff that's pulling this matter must be outside the observable universe, researchers conclude. Another alternative explanation is that the stuff is being *pushed* by an invisible clump of negative gravitational charge matter that is located in the visible part of the universe. --- Is there any evidence of that? A hypothesis which I posited here, a couple of years or so ago, conjectured that there was no big bang but, instead, a cavitation event which occurred in an infinite or nearly infinitely massive Universe which created our universe; a bubble surrounded by a huge block of Swiss cheese, the Universe, for want of a better analogy. If my hypothesis is correct, the accelerating red shift of the galaxies receding toward the wall can be easily accounted for by the inverse square law increasing attraction as the matter in our universe hurtles toward the wall. JF
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
Leak sez: I seem to recall that it wasnt that a human wouldn't swat it, its that a human wouldnt know waht a bee was. I could be wrong. I have not read PKD's novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. However, in the film adaption Blade Runner it seemed obvious to me that the screen writers wrote the script to imply that most humans knew all too well what a bee is. Actually, the question was: what would you do if a WASP (not a bee) landed on your arm. What gave Rachel away (as a replicant) was that she impulsively and with no hesitation said she would swat it, when most humans would have been hesitant and/or averse to killing such creatures because there were so few of them left on the planet.. A little bit of trivia to break the tension. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit
that is not what i mean. if the wind made the ship sail at 10mph, the person on the ship knows that neither the wind nor anything else causes the land to move past him at 10mph. harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, September 26, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit but, wind patterns DO alter rotation, to a degree. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the pool players won't fall over simply because you choose the ball as your frame of reference throughout the process. You have to choose a frame a reference which is inertial (at rest or moving with constant velocity) throughout the entire process, i.e. before, during and after the collision. Anyway this is not really where I wanted to end up because I find myself in agreement with newtonian relativity. lol It is the ahistorical aspect of newtonian relativity which bothers me. When I stand on shore and see a ship sail by, and I know that it was set in motion by the wind. Also a person on the ship knows the shore was not set in motion by the wind. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit if you are choosing that ball as a frame of refference, then that would be true. The point of relativity is that there is no central frame of refference, just what you choose. its not conceit, its reality. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That is true but that is not what I mean. Imagine you are the ball and you are resting wrt to the table and the earth. A cue or another ball hits you so you move at 1 m/s wrt to the table. Would you be so self-centred as to claim you are still resting, and that the table and the earth are now moving under you at 1 m/s? If such a conceit were true the pool players standing around the table would have been flung off their feet as the earth abruptly accelerated under them from 0 m/s to 1 m/s. Harry - Original Message - From: leaking pen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit Yes. It is more the opposite, but every step you take, you push the Earth, and she pushes back at you. The Earth pushes a hell of a lot harder, but you DO have an effect on the motion of the Earth, however infintesimal, with each step. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 11:18 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Chinese building space drive unit OrionWorks wrote: I bet this device look familiar to a few vorts! See: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/09/chinese- buildin.html Uh -- not me; looks sort of like an antique picture tube, maybe, but I don't recognize it. I notice Emdrive hasn't gotten as far as running a spell checker over their front page, which doesn't automatically fill one with confidence. From the description, it appears to be a microwave oven. Surprising that they claim it will fly. I had one other comment on the website. On the theory page, they say: ... Einstein's Special Law of Relativity in which separate frames of reference have to be applied at velocities approaching the speed of light. This is absolutely false. SR does *not* require that you must apply separate frames of reference when approaching the speed of light. In fact any analysis which relies on total momentum or energy *must* be carried out entirely within a *single* reference frame or else you'll end up with nonsensical results (just as they have apparently done here). In the FAQs they say: Thus the system of EM wave and waveguide can be regarded as an open system, with the EM wave and the waveguide having separate frames of reference. This is complete nonsense. The reference frame chosen is based on what makes it easiest to solve a particular problem. There's nothing magical about relativity theory here, nor is there any mystical significance to the term reference frame; *exactly* the same concept exists in ordinary Newtonian mechanics. When a pool player strikes a ball, in the frame of the table, the cue and the player's arm have significant momentum just before the ball is hit. Afterwards, the table, player, and cue have
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:42:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] In an industrial society, the people who make things must have enough money to buy those things. [snip] If that were the case, there would be none left over for those who don't make anything. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
you mean, like all the rich that inherit their wealth, and dont do anything useful with it? They get plenty of things, it seems. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:42:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] In an industrial society, the people who make things must have enough money to buy those things. [snip] If that were the case, there would be none left over for those who don't make anything. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VO]: OT: Get a Rope!
Howdy Vorts, Sec.Henry Paulson announced the bailout of AIG with a loan of $ 85 bil of our money. Guess which investor gets paid 100 cents on the dollar on this deal?? Goldman-Sachs and Pimco ( Pimpco for the California state pension funds).. guess who ran Goldman- Sachs before he was appoint treasury secretary? Henry Paulson. Who just bought 4 bil in preferred stock in Goldman-Sachs at 115 bucks a share with a guaranteed 10% interest? Warren Buffett. PLUS Warren gets an option to buy 4 bil in common stock in G-S for 115 bucks a share fixed base price over the next 5 years ?? and G-S stock is now selling above $ 135 and change ...Warren Buffett . Who is Warren Buffett? His firm owns a huge re-insurance firm named General Reinsurance co ( GenRe). who the heck are they?? They kinda.. sorta run the insurance industry that AIG sorta lays off risk onto.. like a bookie lays off his bets. GenRe kinda loaned some wash money to AIG last year that sorta fell off the back of the truck on the way to the bank.Just a piddlin 10 bil, no big deal. Buffett also owns GEICO insurance .. the one with the green geeko. Meanwhile , back at the ranch.. in Texas.. American General Insurance co, the wealthiest insurer around in cash money in the bank was bought by AIG with IOU's sometime back.. BUT.. the Texas Insurance commission balked recently when AIG needed to borrow 40 bil from AmerGen... Not to worry.. the Fed is bigger than the state as we learned after the last shot was fired in the Civil War as 550,000 dead soldiers learned the hard way that money talks louder than bullets or slavery. Sooo.. do you suppose the Fed can now sorta borrow $ 40 bil from AmerGen now? Bartender is now taking bets that G-S and Buffett are now expanding their vault to hold the $ 700 bil in bailout money. Too bad about WaMu.. but.. heck. with a name like that.. coulda get a date with a gal from Dime Box Texas. Richard
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
In reply to leaking pen's message of Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:31:48 -0700: Hi, [snip] you mean, like all the rich that inherit their wealth, and dont do anything useful with it? They get plenty of things, it seems. Yes they are amongst those I meant. The bottom line is that in our current society, those who *do* produce, produce *more* than they consume (actually quite a bit more), and this excess is consumed by those who produce nothing. Actually that's very simplistic, because there is great variety in the amount produced and consumed by individuals. IOW among the producers there are those who produce nearly nothing, and those who produce vast amounts. The same goes for consumers. My statement below was not intended to present my point of view (which it doesn't represent), but rather to point out that's Jed's statement was wrong. What he said implied that the producers and consumers are one and the same, whereas I was trying to point out that that is frequently not the case. On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:42:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] In an industrial society, the people who make things must have enough money to buy those things. [snip] If that were the case, there would be none left over for those who don't make anything. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
