>
>At 11:18 AM 8/16/96 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>I don't reject it. Guess it depends on how you define it, but without
>>development humans wouldn't have left the trees or caves. Development is a
>>good thing if done with a bit of foresight and intelligence. It sounds
>>kind of arrogant for us to sit here enjoying development and suggesting
>>that other peoples shouldn't? To me development would include medical
>>advances and the like. Who are we to say that people in the third world
>>shouldn't enjoy good health and longer lives too?
>
>i suppose i would call this a naive attempt to 'define' development, but it
>establishes two things:
Jason do you think you could possible reply to anyone without insulting
them. why is Betty naive and you i suppose are right?
>i've spent a year doing five years of research on this area,
what do you mean. are you sooooo good that you can do 5 yrs research in
one yr. come on jason you really do bignote yourself.
what you said after this i just couldn't be bothered to respond to - more
of the same - jason is right - listen to me girls!
i expect heavy flaming for daring to criticise a male so please go for it.
Kylie.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
