Hi, Brad,
You are confounding some tribal practices
with Islamic ones. Such mutilation has nothing to do with ‘Allah’.
Islamic settings have for significant
periods provided cutting edge technology and science to the world, and there is
no reason to think that that will not continue to be the case.
Cheers,
Lawry
I
respectfully submit that the issue of fundamentalists who, socially,
will rip
out women's genitalia to perfect them for Allah and then
bury them
alive under cover-all smocks to avoid arousing men's sexual
drive
(why not castrate instead of just circumcising?), etcc...
-- why
these everything is bad except G-d's Word (which is Good even
when it
tells you to murder your son!) -- why these people cannot
understanf
that nuclear physics is Western Secular Degeneracy, and
why they
don't disavow the atom just like they disavow MTV (E=MTV**2, etc.).
These
people are getting off too easy with their ideological
double-think.
If you want nuclear fission, then you also want
the
"enlightenment" Weltanschauung which alone created it, starting
ca.
Galileo, and which the 16th/17th century Chinese, according
to Joseph
Needham "got right": When the Jesuits came to China
and
offered the wonders of Galilean physics/technology as side-effects
of
accepting Jesus Christ as your Personal Lord and Savior, the Chinese
recognized
that Christianisty was just one more ethnic belief system like the
50 or so
they already tolerated in their kingdon, but that Galilean
physics
they recognized was something new, because it was true not just for those who
were
childreared (and often genitally mutillated, I may add...) to
believe
in it,
but it was true for any person who took the
effort to
do the proofs/demonstrations/.experiments for himself.
If Iran
wanta an atom bomb, then at least they should also want Descartes,
if not
also Erasmus, Rabelais, Kant, Husserl, Habermas et al.
H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e-s
(or the Holier-than-everyone-else
variety,
in this case, of course). An Allah with post-Rutherford
atomic
particles seems to me to be in need of im-Mullah-ation lest
the
"believers" souls end up in the wrong place for all eternity.
\brad
mccormick
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Lawry
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: Darryl & Natalia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 3:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Futurework] Back to Chernobyl
>
>
>
> Thanks, Lawry,
>
>
>
> Any way to confirm this? I would think that Iran, and other nations
foolish
> enough to consider the Russian product would appreciate this tidbit.
Though
> I'm certain all reactors sold are to be "used only as directed",
it would be
> useful info for those who need it for accurate assessment or study. If
> correct, it really should be made public. And I realize this could be
> difficult.
>
>
>
> Natalia
>
>
>
>
>
> NAV scanned
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Lawrence de Bivort <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> To: [email protected]
>
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:32 AM
>
> Subject: [Futurework] Back to Chernobyl
>
>
>
> Greetings, everyone,
>
>
>
> After our discussion some time ago on Chernobyl, we were left with some
> uncertainty over just what happened. This information is from a reliable
> source, one of the Russian engineering team that went into Chernobyl to
> assess the accident and its causes. They used robots, of course.
>
>
>
> The reactor is a graphite, and had no containment vessel. There were about
> 200 tons of enriched uranium (235) in Unit Four, the one that had the
> accident. The crew was experimenting with the possibility of increasing
the
> heat yield (and thus the amount of steam that could run the
> electricity-generating turbines) and lost control of the reactor. Steam
> built up rapidly within the core, and blew the top of the reactor off.
Then
> there was a second explosion, equal they think to an 'inefficient' atomic
> bomb in power. This dispersed into the atmosphere, to a height of
70,000
> feet, approximately 190 tons of the enriched uranium. Thus now in the
> reactor only about 10 tons of the material is left. It was covered hastily
> in a concrete 'sarcophagus.' The Ukraine is asking for more international
> money to redo the sarcophagus, as it is deteriorating. The official
story
> is that the great majority of the uranium is still in the sarcophagus, but
> photographs show that this is not correct.
>
>
>
> This person did not look at the health impacts of the explosion.
>
>
>
> The remaining three units remain in operation today. This is the same
model
> that the Russians have sold to the Iranians, in a deal made in '91 or '92.
> The Iranians are having to pay more and more, and they still don't have
> their reactor.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Lawry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> size=2 width="100%" align=center>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Futurework mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
>
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good
works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
