Re: ChristiaNazis: AOL 'IM' (I AM) is Blasphemy
On 2/1/06, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://thoughtcrimes.org/s9/index.php?/archives/487-My-AOL-CD-told-me- to-shoot-Steve-Case.html http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48585 Hm. What was that word I used to describe Pat Robertson? Oh, yeah. Whacknoodle. That would describe these folks, as well. -- Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: 2004 Presidential Race Analysis
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:16:31 -0400, John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Consider, for example, this more detailed look: Bush States Never in Doubt: AK, UT, ID, MT, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, MS, AL, GA, SC, KY, IN 133 EV's Odd. I just get 96. Kerry States Never in Doubt: HI, CA, IL, DC, MD, NY, VT, MA, CT, RI 150 EV's Check. Bush States That Were Thought About, But Never Really In Play: AR, LA, TN, NC, VA, 54 EV's - 187 EV Total Check. Kerry States That Were Thought About, But Never Really In Play WA, DE, NJ 29 EV's - 179 Total Check. So, at this point it is Bush 187, Kerry 179 - a narrow Bush lead. States That Appear to Be Conceded by the Kerry Campaign AZ, MO, WV, CO 35 EV's - 222 Total Check. States that Appear to Be Conceded by the Bush Campaign OR, MI, ME, MN 38EV's - 217 Total Check. This leaves the remaining solid battlegrouds of: NV - 5, NM - 5, IA - 7, WI - 10, OH - 20, PA - 21, FL - 27, and NH - 4 99 EV's Total Check. You left out a couple of states. I think the people of Wyoming would be disappointed in you Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Quick message from David Brin
Got mail from DB this morning, which included the following: Tell the gang that I'll post the URL of my Big Salvo in just a few days. So I'm passing it along. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Quick message from D B
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:20:32 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/9/2004 9:17:38 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Got mail from DB this morning, So did I, and in PUNishment wrote the Tytlal Yodell Song. And what a fine PUNishment it was, too! :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Another explanation for the hurricanes hitting Florida
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cyberwar-04l.html Maybe Gaia doesn't like spam. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Br!n: Re: The opinion of heaven?
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 08:17:13 -0700, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you realize that Tim Lahaye, one of the Left Behind authors, is and has long been a very politically active person and helped put Bush in office? Many consider him the primary organizer behind the extreme politics of Falwell, etc. He was doing that long before the books. The White House won't say if Bush has read the books. Given that, from what I've heard, Bush doesn't tend to read, period, I think it somewhat unlikely that he's read those particular books. A few years ago, I visited my parents-in-law, who attend a Pentecostal-type church. Before the service, someone came up to my mother-in-law and was going on about the first book, and how everyone should read it. The way she talked about it creeped me out a bit. I have since received the first two books as gifts (from someone else) and have not read either yet. They're pretty far down on my list. Maybe in 2007 or 2008, I might get to the first one ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: L. Gordon Cooper, 1927-2004
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 18:09:34 -0500, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another of the original _Mercury_ astronauts is gone: http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/oct/HQ_04335_cooper_dies.html Who's left? (Or is that in the article which I haven't read yet?) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: NASA PARTNERS WITH TEACHER NETWORK FOR SCHOOL YEAR
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:12:50 -0500, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [I suppose some PR person decided that NEAT sounded better than booby prize.] That would depend on the type of booby. ;) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: some thoughts and quotes.
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:03:05 -0200, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Brin PS... by all my logic (above and elsewhere) the most telling endeavor of the monsters has been to try to forever eliminate the Inheritance Tax, which is by its very nature the most fair and sociologically productive of all taxes. Nobody need ever pay it, so long as they choose some other charitable way to dispose of the funds, (...) Wrong logic! The best way to avoid the Inheritance task is mass-rape and have so many children that none will get enough to be taxed! DNA-rebuilt Gengis Khan for President!!! :-) The inheritance tax isn't based on how much each individual inherits, it's based on the size of the entire estate. The estate taxes are paid, and whatever is left over is what the heirs get. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:09:43 -0230, Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As for your take on it, I can certainly see where you're coming from, and can even agree on -'the presence of self-awareness, being almost by definition other-awareness as well, changes how an I-conscious being behaves'- as I'm sure that the awareness of others would definitely change how an 'I-conscious' being behaves. A simple example of this would be someone observing proper table manners when dining with other people. Conversely, when eating alone, I doubt that many people give a rodent's posterior as to how much of their food ends up on their shirt as opposed to in their mouth (a little extreme, but you get the point). As far as your overall scheme though, I'm not buying. But that's just me...being an individual. Bad example -- you ignore the stain factor. :) I'm equally caring about the amount of spaghetti sauce on my shirt whether dining alone or with others. Chewing with one's mouth open, on the other hand Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: God is Not a Republican. Or a Democrat
God is an iron. (Spider Robinson.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Diebold systems contain feature that allows tampering at central tabulator
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/?q=node/view/78 (Article dated 8/26/04) Quote: By entering a 2-digit code in a hidden location, a second set of votes is created. This set of votes can be changed, so that it no longer matches the correct votes. The voting system will then read the totals from the bogus vote set. It takes only seconds to change the votes, and to date not a single location in the U.S. has implemented security measures to fully mitigate the risks. This program is not stupidity or sloppiness. It was designed and tested over a series of a dozen version adjustments. I thought this might be of interest to some. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Not quite how I would have put it...
POPLAR BLUFF, Mo. (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) offered an unexpected reason on Monday for cracking down on frivolous medical lawsuits: Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country. Full article at http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=584e=5u=/nm/20040907/pl_nm/odd_bush_dc (or http://tinyurl.com/7yp4v ) It is a problem -- I know of a number of OBs who are no longer practicing obstetrics, and for at least some of them, it's the whole frivolous lawsuit thing that's pushed them to quit. (I imagine some other folks here know of others in that boat, as well.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 23:57:54 -0230, Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: The Mercies of The Vatican Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:59 -0500 On Aug 31, 2004, at 6:47 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: I don't really buy the idea of someone becoming immortal by putting his consciousness into a machine. There'd be immediate divergence which would only grow over time; in essence you'd have two distinct entities in very short order. (Oh, you could kill the body -- but that would end the distinct consciousness in the body. I don't think there's one essence allotted to a person, IOW.) Poul Anderson explored this some in his series beginning with _Harvest the Stars_. I recommend it. (Not just for that, but for other divergence issues.) But would you recommend it for it's quality as a novel? Personally I thought it was a poor book. It wasn't as good as the second in the series, which I read first. If I read a series out of order, I'm expecting the first one not to be quite so good. (I'd gotten the second one as a gift from a friend who's recommended books that weren't so great in quality as novels, but which explored some ideas new to me and those ideas were the basis for recommendation.) It beats a lot of pulp, certainly, but it's not in the league with any of the recent Hugo winners, how's that? :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: free will (horse-style)
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 02:07:28 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5 Sep 2004, at 1:17 am, Deborah Harrell wrote: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Like Chun The Unavoidable nowadays :) ??? Jack Vance What specifically? Titles? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Did Nixon Debate Humphrey?
Nope. GWYDU. (Google nixon humphrey debate and look at the last 2 entries on the first page of results.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 21:58:34 +, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Land wrote: Humans are a peak in evolution, because we can't evolve further except by artificial means. The saber-tooth tiger was also a peak in evolution, and look at what happened to them. Humans are *a* peak in evolution, but not necessarily *the* peak. Exactly what I wrote, as there can be no two the peak, and I mentioned two peaks :-P Alberto Monteiro Well, a peak could be seen as a local maximum, and you could have a number of local maximums and one maximum that would be the peak. Kind of like some mountains. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:14:20 -0700, Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 31, 2004, at 6:47 PM, Alberto Monteiro wrote: I imagine that if it were possible to keep cutting with surviving remains we would get other smaller versions of I. I'm sure you're correct. This is actually one reason I was so intrigued by _Kiln People_ -- a sort of energetic resonance being passed into clay, and then inloaded (before it had too much time to digress into its own consciousness) is an interesting idea. If you haven't read the book you might want to. ;) It's why I don't really buy the idea of someone becoming immortal by putting his consciousness into a machine. There'd be immediate divergence which would only grow over time; in essence you'd have two distinct entities in very short order. (Oh, you could kill the body -- but that would end the distinct consciousness in the body. I don't think there's one essence allotted to a person, IOW.) Poul Anderson explored this some in his series beginning with _Harvest the Stars_. I recommend it. (Not just for that, but for other divergence issues.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: A pox on both your houses
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:35:41 -0500, Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just saw this pox on both your houses commentary by Sebastian Mallaby. I don't fully agree with it. In my opinion, there is too wide a range of things that have gone wrong in exactly the same way to attribute it to pure bungling. I am looking at expressing the problem as two parts of a dilemma that must be solved being advcocated by two groups in the US. What we need is a synthesis between the two views. This idea isn't fully developed yet, but I do think Mr. Mallaby is just a bit off the mark, but close enough to be worth considering. quote Bush smashed the Taliban in Afghanistan, even though large parts of the Democratic foreign policy establishment opposed any strategy involving boots on the ground. Bush announced the biggest expansion in foreign assistance in recent memory and designed a smart way of dispensing it. Bush ousted Saddam Hussein, whereas the Democratic establishment, which also believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and also talked the talk of regime change, would never have done anything so risky. John Kerry, on the other hand, is a lot more timid. He's fudging the question about whether he would have gone into Iraq, but his record suggests that his appetite for foreign policy risk is between small and zero. He voted against stationing intermediate nuclear missiles in Europe in the 1980s, against the Nicaraguan contras and against the Persian Gulf War. Seared by the experience of Vietnam, he is on the risk-averse wing of the risk-averse party. But the United States does not have the option of withdrawing from the war on terrorism in the way that it withdrew from Saigon. Kerry's inclinations seem wrong for the times that we live in. Now I'll flop the other way. Bush's clear foreign policy principles are matched by clear foreign policy incompetence. After routing the Taliban, Bush's Pentagon insisted, against all experience and good sense, that the country could be rebuilt with a peacekeeping force of only 5,000 troops confined to the capital. At one point a senior State Department official mooted a fivefold expansion in that force, and just about every outside expert on nation-building agreed. But these voices were ignored. As a result, Afghanistan is descending into the hands of drug-dealing warlords. Then came the Iraq mess. Bush and his officials over-interpreted the evidence on weapons of mass destruction, treating suppositions as hard facts. They failed to plan for the postwar operation, and they acted surprised when the power vacuum caused by the regime's implosion triggered looting and mayhem. They needlessly alienated allies with taunts about old Europe. And they permitted the Abu Ghraib abuses, which have damaged America's reputation and influence for years to come. By going into Iraq, Bush showed a welcome willingness to take risks and preempt threats; he showed that the United States could project force aggressively. But by going into Iraq, Bush showed an inability to calibrate risk and preempt possible setbacks; he has damaged America's ability to project force aggressively. Now take economic policy. Despite early steel and farm protectionism, Bush has turned out to be good on trade and globalization. His team launched the Doha round of global trade talks, which will focus on liberalization that helps poor countries. It has kept them moving ahead, despite the protectionist pressures generated by a weak economy. It has resisted turning China into a trade whipping boy, despite pressure to do so from both business and labor. Again, Kerry is not so forthright. He refuses to support the Central American Free Trade Agreement because he says it has inadequate labor protections, even though there are real labor protections in the deal and even though the best protection for workers is the economic growth to which free trade contributes. Kerry cannot bring himself to issue a statement welcoming progress in the Doha talks, even though global free trade could lift 500 million people out of poverty, according to William Cline of the Center for Global Development, and even though it could enrich the United States to the tune of $200 billion annually, according to Harvard's Jeff Frankel, a former Clinton official. On the other hand you have domestic economic policy. Bush's tax cuts are regressive, even though technology and globalization are already increasing inequality. Bush's tax cuts are enormous, even though we face a baby bust and terrifying long-term trends in health care inflation. And Bush has presided over an explosion of government spending. He has never once wielded his veto to block pork-barrel waste, and his efforts on entitlements consist of ignoring the recommendations of his own Social Security commission, plus creating a brand new entitlement to prescription drugs for retirees. So which
Re: Iraq Ghostpost
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:56:29 -0500, Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I read this disturbing report from the NYT today. It appears that Iraq is better poised for disintegration than elections in January, if this is true. If the factual statements listed in this article are true, then the provisional government/the US seems to be in the process of losing its grip on the country. A quote illustrates the problem: quote In the past three weeks, three former Hussein loyalists appointed to important posts in Falluja and Ramadi have been eliminated by the militants and their Baathist allies. The chief of a battalion of the American-trained Iraqi National Guard in Falluja was beheaded by the militants, prompting the disintegration of guard forces in the city. The Anbar governor was forced to resign after his three sons were kidnapped. The third official, the provincial police chief in Ramadi, was lured to his arrest by American marines after three assassination attempts led him to secretly defect to the rebel cause. The national guard commander and the governor were both forced into humiliating confessions, denouncing themselves as traitors on videotapes that sell in the Falluja marketplace for 50 cents. The tapes show masked men ending the guard commander's halting monologue, toppling him to the ground, and sawing off his head, to the accompaniment of recorded Koranic chants ordaining death for those who make war upon Allah. The governor is shown with a photograph of himself with an American officer, sobbing as he repents working with the infidel Americans, then being rewarded with a weeping reunion with his sons. end quote Very interesting. I might like to read the rest of the article. But I don't want that badly enough to go to the NYT website and hunt down the article; if you want discussion on these articles, it would greatly facilitate that if you would include links to the full article as well as the quotes. (This isn't the first time you've posted about an article that you included no link for, but at least this time I had an inkling as to which website to try to find the original article you refer to.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Iraq Ghostpost
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 20:38:53 -0400, Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 07:35:56PM -0500, Julia Randolph wrote: as well as the quotes. (This isn't the first time you've posted about an article that you included no link for, but at least this time I had an inkling as to which website to try to find the original article you refer to.) I'm guessing he read it the old-fashioned way. If so, he went through a lot of effort to type up the quote. :) Well, maybe not so much -- that was just a couple of paragraphs. I've done much longer, but it can be tedious, especially checking carefully for typos. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gmail
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:04:47 -0500, Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is anyone interested in a gmail account? I have a couple of invites. I have sent the invites I had available for listmembers. I will probably make this offer again sometime in the future, depending on how many invites Gmail sees fit to provide me. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gmail
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:32:00 -0400, Bryon Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:07:44 -0500, Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:04:47 -0500, Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is anyone interested in a gmail account? I have a couple of invites. I have sent the invites I had available for listmembers. I will probably make this offer again sometime in the future, depending on how many invites Gmail sees fit to provide me. :) Were there some people who wanted them but you didn't have enough to go around? I was about to offer gmail invites as well when you beat me to the punch... So if anyone still wants a gmail invite and hasn't got one, I have some to share as well. I had 2 to share with listmembers, got 2 requests, fulfilled them, and announced I was out for now. I'll let you know if someone gets back to me about it. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Gmail
Is anyone interested in a gmail account? I have a couple of invites. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Alcohol and Kids Brains
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 23:33:45 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 24 Aug 2004, at 10:26 pm, Deborah Harrell wrote: So this isn't a recipe thread then? Guess not. I was thinking more along the lines of as a preservative for. So's you can keep it in a jar on the shelf or something. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Alcohol and neuron function (was: The Mercies of The Vatican)
On Sat, 23 Aug 1980 14:46:27 -0500, Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 2:28 PM Subject: Alcohol and neuron function (was: The Mercies of The Vatican) various extracts (like vanilla) contain miniscule amounts of ethanol In that case, Jack Daniels contains miniscule amounts of ethanol. Vanilla is 'bout 80 proof. :-) I thought it was higher than that. I was told at some point that to calculate proof, you multiplied %age alcohol by 2. (The only bottle of anything I have handy that lists proof bears this out, it being 30% alchohol and 60 proof.) Now, my vanilla extract bottle doesn' t give that information, but my bottle of peppermint extract is 89% alcohol, according to the label. And someone who was interested in the question looked at a whole bunch of labels and determined that a certain brand of wintergreen extract had the highest alcohol content available, of everything in that grocery store; it was over 90% alcohol. So that would be over 180 proof, right? And I believe that while some of the alcohol cooks out, not all of it does. But if you're making a large batch of cookies with several pounds of ingredients, and only a couple of tablespoons of vanilla extract, the remaining alcohol will be quite diluted by the rest of the ingredients. (Adding vanilla extract to whipping cream before whipping, instead of using sugar, will give you a higher alcohol content, but still fairly negligible compared to the stuff it's in. Vanilla extract is nice stuff, lends a good flavor to all sorts of things.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Alcohol and neuron function (was: The Mercies of The Vatican)
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:35:19 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23 Aug 1980, at 8:46 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 2:28 PM Subject: Alcohol and neuron function (was: The Mercies of The Vatican) various extracts (like vanilla) contain miniscule amounts of ethanol In that case, Jack Daniels contains miniscule amounts of ethanol. Vanilla is 'bout 80 proof. :-) Minimum 70-proof required by the FDA in the USA at any rate. Maybe the minuscule refers to the fact it's mostly bought in 1 oz bottles for home use. My bottle, unlabelled as to alcohol content, is an 8-ounce bottle. But that may be the biggest bottle I can buy. (I haven't looked lately, as an 8-ounce bottle lasts me for awhile.) The peppermint extract bottle is 1 ounce. It's used in miniscule quantities in recipes, at least in comparison with other ingredients. Even if you buy a huge bottle at the warehouse club (say, something on the order of a liter or so), you're still not using a lot in comparison with what you're mixing it into. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Cringely on incarceration of US population
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:37:42 -0400, Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is really pathetic that you consider that a worthwhile thrust of the article. I'm told... that there is a great solution to a difficult problem that the Man has ignored? You, Gary, are the kind of person most responsible for people like Bush and his cronies coming to power. How are people of Gary's ilk responsible for that, exactly? And I thought the article was a cautionary tale of sorts, at least that was the impression the first paragraph gave me: The interface between science and public policy is awkward at best. Scientists and academics need money for research, while politicians need research to build better weapons and sometimes to justify intended policy changes. But what happens if you look for scientific support for some new policy and the results of the research show that what you are intending to do is wrong? You can change your plan or ignore the research. This latter decision, one example of which is the topic of this column, brings with it some peril because if it later becomes known that the research was commissioned, completed, and ignored, then someone's job is on the line. So if you are going to bury research findings, it is a good idea to bury them deep. I guess that if it came out in a column, it wasn't buried deep enough. BTW, I found the link on a mailing list where, on-list, what would happen would be either no response or some hand-wringing, but off-list, the activists there would add it to their list of problems to be addressed in a manner that might actually start seeing some results. I posted it here because I was interested in what debaters would have to say about it. You, Erik, have not disappointed me -- you found something to debate right away. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Cringely on incarceration of US population
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20040812.html The study used to come up with the current sentencing guidelines contained information ignored by those who set up the guidelines. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Maximum Ice
So I have here a copy of _Maximum Ice_ by Kay Kenyon. How is it? I believe a few people here have already read it Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:36:57 +0200, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William T Goodall wrote: UK:Anglican and Roman Catholic 40 million, Muslim 1.5 million, Presbyterian 800,000, Methodist 760,000, Sikh 500,000, Hindu 500,000, Jewish 350,000 (population total 60,270,708) So that would be: 66% RC, 19% Muslim, 1.3% Presbytarian, 1.2%Methodist, 0.8%Sikh, 0.8% Hindu, 0.6% Jewish No, Anglican and Roman Catholic are lumped together there; I'm guessing that the majority of the people in that group are Anglican, and not RC. There's a difference. Something about a Pope not granting an annulment way back when And I'm also guessing that a lot more people in the UK give their affiliation as Anglican than actually go to church with any sort of frequency. (I'm not as sure on this guess as I am on the first one.) From the CSI factbook Sonja :o) GCU: Meaningless numbers Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Maximum Ice
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:21:57 -0400, Gary Nunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I have here a copy of _Maximum Ice_ by Kay Kenyon. How is it? I believe a few people here have already read it Julia It's a good read, if I am a bit biased. Along with Dr. Brin, Kay Kenyon is one of my favorite authors. My all time favorite book by her is _Seeds of Time_. Pick it up and read it if you have the time. The next book she wrote after _Maximum Ice_ was called _Braided World_. It had some very bizarre plot lines and character personalities and it was also an enjoyable book. We have both of those, now, as well. Purchased all of them on Saturday. I was just flipping through the stuff before the actual novel and saw a few familiar names in the acknowledgements :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:31:28 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18 Aug 2004, at 6:01 pm, Julia Randolph wrote: And I'm also guessing that a lot more people in the UK give their affiliation as Anglican than actually go to church with any sort of frequency. (I'm not as sure on this guess as I am on the first one.) http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/heavenandearth/mori_data.shtml This Mori poll found that 18% of British Adults aged 16+ considered themselves a practising member of an organised religion and 25% a non-practising member of an organised religion. That's *all* religions. Whatever a non-practising member is. Weddings and funerals? Considering themselves affiliated with the religion in question, but not actually attending services, etc. on any sort of regular basis. Weddings and funerals, and sometimes baptisms, but I believe that they tend to discourage baptism of babies when the parents aren't committed to bringing up the child as practicing the religion. Easter and Christmas for some non-practicing Christians, perhaps. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:56:11 -0400, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 08:15 AM 8/17/2004 -0500 Julia Randolph wrote: JDG - Perhaps The Fool should stick to posting about atheism, Maru, and leave the Catholicism posts to the Catholics. He's entitled to an opinion. And if you argue well, you may convince others to take your side in a particular debate. Sorry... I momentarily had thought you were the *other* Julia in your response.Anyhow, I reacted so forcefully in part because there is a long history of anti-religious, anti-Christian, and anti-Catholic sentiment on this List. So, I am used to being completely on the defensive in regards to these subjects. The Fool in particular also has a long history of misrepresentations, and I've grown weary at times of attempting to combat them. I am sorry to have extended my frustration in your general direction. Well, if he hadn't brought the whole thing up in the first place, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to educate me on various points of Catholicism. Does help at all? :) The Roman Catholic Church, and the Vatican in particular, are not my most favorite organizations right now, mostly having to do with a history of protecting pedophiles, especially in certain (geographical) areas. (Certain bishops are taking stands to try to minimize the damage to both their spiritual charges and the Church as a whole; I have great respect for them.) As soon as the Vatican addresses that to my satisfaction, I'll be more favorably inclined. Until then, I may tend toward cynicism towards the RCC, and I hope you don't take that personally. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:41:44 -0400, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 12:01 PM 8/16/2004 -0500, Julia Randolph wrote: On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:17:42 -0500, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--communioncontrove0812au g12,0,6656242.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire 8-year-old's first Holy Communion invalidated by Church By JOHN CURRAN Associated Press Writer August 12, 2004, 2:25 PM EDT BRIELLE, N.J. -- An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot consume wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained none, violating Catholic doctrine. It isn't the first such communion controversy. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Natick, Mass., girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer. So much for Mark 10:14 ( http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/Bible/Mark.html#10:14 ) Julia, you should know better than to believe such Foolish prattlings. What The Fool conveniently left out is that communion can be distributed as either unleavened bread or as wine, and that *each* is considered to be fully the Body *and* Blood of Jesus Christ by the Catholic Church. But what reason would be given for denying the use of non-wheat bread? And does it have to be unleavened? I know that unleavened bread was used at the original event, but I've attended Eucharist services where a loaf of real bread was used and torn up, mostly on church camping trips. Would this be forbidden to Catholics? (I guess that in a pinch, one could always go out and buy some matzo for the purpose, yes?) And I've attended a few Catholic masses, and based on my very limited experience, pretty much nobody got the wine. Did I just attend some weird churches, or is this common? And I've been to some protestant-denomination churches where grape juice, not wine, was used; is this allowable? If not, what was done during Prohibition? (I'm interested in finding out what sorts of alcohol was allowed and under what circumstances during Prohibition; I know the government allowed doctors to have whiskey for medicinal purposes, my grandfather having been a doctor for the last part of Prohibition and having had whiskey in his office to give patients when that was appropriate) JDG - Perhaps The Fool should stick to posting about atheism, Maru, and leave the Catholicism posts to the Catholics. He's entitled to an opinion. And if you argue well, you may convince others to take your side in a particular debate. Me, I'm going to be somewhat cynical about the Vatican's attitude towards children until there's some sort of apology from them regarding the protection of pedophiles by the Catholic Church, but that's not germane to this thread. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: The Mercies of The Vatican
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:17:42 -0500, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--communioncontrove0812au g12,0,6656242.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire 8-year-old's first Holy Communion invalidated by Church By JOHN CURRAN Associated Press Writer August 12, 2004, 2:25 PM EDT BRIELLE, N.J. -- An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot consume wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained none, violating Catholic doctrine. It isn't the first such communion controversy. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Natick, Mass., girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer. So much for Mark 10:14 ( http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/Bible/Mark.html#10:14 ) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] Science, Politics Collide in Election Year
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:19:57 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 16 Aug 2004, at 7:33 pm, Dave Land wrote: On Aug 16, 2004, at 4:39 AM, William T Goodall wrote: Is there no limit to the twisted sick evildoing of these sick twisted evildoing religious freaks? [1] [1] Rhetorical question. Is there no limit to the one-note playing of these sad, tiresome anti-religious freaks? Is there no limit to the twisted sick evildoing of these sick twisted evildoing religious freaks? [1] [1] Rhetorical question. Is there no limit to the repetition in this sub-thread? [2] [2] Rhetorical answer Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [L3] RE: Indivisible (was: Karmic slappage)
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:48:41 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adapt or die. That is what all human social constructs must do. Permanent rigidity in thought will cause 'death' of the organization - look at frex the Shakers. Your organization is more likely to survive if it's a community that allows procreation within the community than if it's a community that doesn't allow procreation. :) But they were a useful organization to the greater community, being a good place for raising orphans and taking in widows who didn't want to remarry and didn't have the resources to survive on their own. Adapt or die -- as society changed and there wasn't as great a need for the services they provided because other constructs had come along to do those jobs, the communities died out one by one. (I think I remember there being 4 surviving Shakers at some point, and within 5 years it was down to 1) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Br!n: Fight The Future: Encrypted Screws
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:03:43 +, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It gets worse: I am planning a large-scale battle of Go-go's against Plastic Soldiers with Bernardo, using tables with To-Hit, Damage, and Hit Points. Alberto where is that book 'Satanism for dummies'? Monteiro Will this one do? http://www.pegasuspublishing.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=17542cat=281page=1 The picture isn't all that great, but it's the cover for Necronomicon for Dummies. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Br!n: Fight The Future: Encrypted Screws
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:57:57 -0700, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It brought back a great memory of the first time I managed to print a sine wave with asterisks on a (30 baud) Teletype. Reminds me of the story of someone who attempted to log into a BBS at 300 baud by whistling. He'd get as far as the login prompt but couldn't whistle a valid username and password Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [L3 ] Re: Jesus-anity and the status of women
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 22:18:27 +0100, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10 Aug 2004, at 8:02 pm, Travis Edmunds wrote: However you seem to have proved me wrong. It's nice you can admit that. There are some people on this list who would argue black was white rather than admit they were mistaken about anything... And then some of *them* will promptly get killed at the next zebra crossing, right? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Interesting times . . .
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:34:56 -0500, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nbc13.com/news/3644270/detail.html They've called off the search for the night after 7 hours . . . Ronald W. (Ronn!) Blankenship 1329 McCoy Street Cheers. ( http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?ed=N9ELkOp_0TriBYxEny2KpJFUKMQfL785zDmkJw--csz=Birmingham%2C+ALcountry=usnew=1name=qty= ) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Objective Evil
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 07:46:24 -0700, Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gary Denton wrote: Since I am a UU - formed from the merger of two creedless churchs this is a matter of great fun for me. Then you get should the joke... A Unitarian dies and finds himself facing a sign that says Heaven, with an arrow pointing to the right, and Discussion of Heaven, with an arrow pointing to the left. The Unitarian goes to the left, of course. Q: What do you get when you cross a Unitarian with a Jehovah's Witness? A: Someone who goes door to door for no particular reason. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Objective Evil
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 05:54:39 -0700 (PDT), Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you please define Trinity for this purpose? Being baptized in the Trinity is being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. IIRC without looking (I'm at work now and supposed to be working!), its in the Nicene Creed. Yes. Googling gave some useful pages on the creed. Here are translations from three different pages: http://www.mit.edu/~tb/anglican/intro/lr-nicene-creed.html We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11049a.htm We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen. http://www.creeds.net/ancient/nicene.htm (Three versions given on this page; one is identical to the first one posted, the other two are below.) We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father; through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven, was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became truly human. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again
Re: Every Single Sperm
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 05:20:12 -0500, The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [EMAIL PROTECTED] Russell Chapman wrote: JDG wrote: At 10:32 AM 8/7/2004 +0200 Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: When it threatened to decrease the number of flock considerably or more to the point when contraception started interfering with the power base of the holy church. Is it so inconceivable that maybe - just maybe - they sincerely believe that God does not want us to engage in contraception? Well, yes - if there's no basis for it. No scriptures, no tablets handed down from on high. Do they sincerely believe we shouldn't take vitamins? That we shouldn't have remedial surgery. Why is some meddling with the body to improve quality of life OK but other meddling not OK? Enter 'Jehova's witnesses'. NO MEDDLING with the body. Not even to save a childs life or to prevent serious and detrimental health problems (even in babies and little children) by as simple a thing as vaccination by oral injestion of vaccin. They really still teach that in Europe? I know they have backed down on most of those here in the U.S. with the exception of blood transfusions. I'm guessing they backed down on those because of the pressure of lawsuits. There's also the issue of immunizations being required by law if children are going to public school. If you don't immunize your child without good medical reason, the child cannot enroll in public school. And it's not as easy to home-school children in some states as it is in others. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Horses
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 15:55:53 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote That other grazing animals have this same type of color vision (assuming the first site cited above is correct) would certainly point to an evolutionary advantage -- after all, how else to describe the great green-grey Limpopo River (IIRC)?. ;) You forgot greasy. :) It was greasy. Great green grey greasy Limpopo River, all set about with fever trees. IIRC. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
