On Oct 9, 2004, at 8:59 AM, Travis Edmunds wrote:
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cyberwar-04l.html
Maybe Gaia doesn't like spam.
My Mom, who is a director for a Bigass Insurance company has always
said that 3/4 of
On Oct 9, 2004, at 7:02 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 10:53 PM
Subject: Another explanation for the hurricanes hitting Florida
http://www.spacedaily.com/news
- Original Message -
From: Julia Randolph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 10:53 PM
Subject: Another explanation for the hurricanes hitting Florida
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cyberwar-04l.html
Maybe Gaia doesn't like
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Another explanation for the hurricanes hitting Florida
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:02:09 -0500
- Original Message -
From: Julia Randolph [EMAIL
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cyberwar-04l.html
Maybe Gaia doesn't like spam.
Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 17 Nov 2003, at 4:12 pm, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You
On 18 Nov 2003, at 2:41 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
The reality of QM is that it is a systematic set of rules and equations
that provide a good fit to observation. Computational methods allow
us to
use things like perturbation theory to obtain predictions that would
have
been impossible to obtain
Julia Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Sonja van Baardwijk wrote:
I HAVE NO KILLFILE. The first one saying I have a killfile ... will ...
be ... eh ... smothered in ...eh ... chocolate sause. ;o)
And this would be bad how? :)
Eh Well it is awfully messy? Or something
- Original Message -
From: Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
physics through a computer science lens
On 17 Nov 2003, at 4:12 pm, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
physics through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing
physics through a physics lens?
Somewhat off topic, but what do you think of
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Sonja van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 4:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Doug Pensinger wrote:
For the information of those who haven't been on the list
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 05:31 PM 11/14/03 +, William T Goodall wrote:
Perhaps it is the way he expresses himself rather than the actual
content?
Are you suggesting that the way John expresses himself to those with
whom he disagrees is more offensive to them than the stuff The Fool
On 16 Nov 2003, at 6:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing physics
through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing physics through
a
physics lens?
It seems to be better actually :)
By definition, a particle is pointline. When it
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Sonja van Baardwijk wrote:
I HAVE NO KILLFILE. The first one saying I have a killfile ... will ...
be ... eh ... smothered in ...eh ... chocolate sause. ;o)
And this would be bad how? :)
Julia
funny, didn't have massive chocolate cravings while I was
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 16 Nov 2003, at 6:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
On 16 Nov 2003, at 11:36 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
Right, the problem is that particles and waves were both partial
understandings. What was needed was a model that included an
inherently
unobservable wave function, collapse of the wave function into an
eigenstate, etc. What was needed was a
From: Alberto Monteiro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Sloan II wrote:
I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a
Dan Minette wrote:
No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil?
Dan M.
No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil.
How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling
religion evil?
Now I'm not excusing his excesses at all, but
Julia asked:
Hm. Wondering now:
how many religious people on list
how many very non-religious people on list
how many people have killfiles
if killfiles by religious people have primarily non-religious people
if killfiles by non-religious people have primarily religious people
I have
Andrew Crystall wrote:
So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific
religions.
I am surrounded by fanatics!!!
Anti-religion? No.
Anti-scientolgist? YES.
Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult
Dangerous? In which way?
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
I have a few on the culture list,
On 15 Nov 2003, at 1:26 pm, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:26:21AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a
detailed study of it.
No one has. THAT's why their unidentified!
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
In a message dated 11/14/2003 9:54:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
All right, OK, very well then! -- puts on attentive
face with glasses and sits with chin on fist
Play ball!
Ata girl
___
At 02:19 PM 11/14/2003 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote:
how many religious people on list
Very free from my estimation.
how many very non-religious people on list
Certainly more than the former.
how many people have killfiles
Well, I would be interested in the results of Jon's proposed poll.
if
At 11:25 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil?
Dan M.
No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil.
How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling
religion evil?
Now I'm not
O.k., I suppose that I have a moral obligation to step in to this
discussion, particularly following Dan's observation.
As perhaps the author of the most famous killfile in list history (in re: a
former listmember) I certainly am not going to bash anyone for setting up a
killfile. I think there
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false
religion a religion too? Or if not, how do
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
when their predictions didn't come true :-)
But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the
defense to
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote:
Then again, maybe none of us are perfect.
Maybe?
I believe that nobody on this list is perfect.
I believe that a lot of people on this list are trying, anyway. And some
are trying in the other sense of the word. :) And maybe some people are
At 09:22 AM 11/15/2003 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money,
and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate
this is?
He never said the above publicly, but years before founding Scientology he
made a comment
Dan Minette wrote:
I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another
SF writer about it. He bet that he could create a
On 15 Nov 2003, at 5:02 pm, Steve Sloan II wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall
Steve Sloan II wrote:
I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another
SF writer about it. He bet that he could
Julia Thompson wrote:
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
when their predictions didn't come true :-)
But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the
defense to be reasonably
On 15 Nov 2003, at 9:34 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original
at an apology since then.
I have read no apologies, on list or off, until now. And I believe I've
read all your posts. 8^)
Then again, maybe none of us are perfect.
No, no one is perfect, nor are they expected to be. As I said in my
explanation, I have avoided directly responding to you for the benefit
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
when their predictions didn't come true :-)
But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false
religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones
from
the true ones? And how can more than one be true?
Why does it have to be a false religion. I've always thought a
At 03:34 PM 11/15/03 -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original
At 08:40 PM 11/15/03 +, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
when their predictions didn't come true :-)
But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 9:34 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote:
No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil?
Dan M
Doug Pensinger wrote:
For the information of those who haven't been on the list for very
long, or who might not understand even though they have, the reason I
do not respond to JDG is that he and I have had several less than
civilized encounters and I decided after the last one (over a year
- Original Message -
From: Sonja van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 4:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Doug Pensinger wrote:
For the information of those who haven't been on the list for very
long, or who might
On 14 Nov 2003, at 4:20 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore
their
posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
religious people expect that they should take regular insults with good
grace, while less insulting
Dan Minette wrote:
I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore their
posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
religious people expect that they should take regular insults with good
grace, while less insulting things written by JDG are the
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may
be out of it now, I'm not sure. Anyway, in case you forgot, I'm not
religious.
--
Erik
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may be
out of it now, I'm not sure. Anyway,
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Hm. Wondering now:
how many religious people on list
I prefer spiritual, but I suppose you could place me
in this category. ;)
how many very non-religious people on list
how many people have killfiles
None currently (I presume this is
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Explanation
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:19:58 -0600 (CST)
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette
On 14 Nov 2003, at 9:22 pm, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 14 Nov 2003 at 14:19, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list
who are
Perhaps you forgot
On 14 Nov 2003, at 8:19 pm, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may
On 14 Nov 2003 at 23:40, William T Goodall wrote:
On 14 Nov 2003, at 9:22 pm, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 14 Nov 2003 at 14:19, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are
scientoligists and made them offensive to me off the list.
So you are also
William T Goodall wrote:
I'm mildly non-religious
No, you are fanatically anti-religious :-P
Alberto Monteiro
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
In a message dated 11/14/2003 4:47:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
well, I *do*
toss out the baseball/football posts frequently :\
No no say it isn't so. I have been engaged in these mostly for your entertainment
___
At 02:19 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[I wrote:]
well, I *do*
toss out the baseball/football posts frequently
:\
No no say it isn't so. I have been engaged in these
mostly for your entertainment
LOL
All right, OK, very well then! -- puts on attentive
face with glasses and sits with chin on fist
Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who are
religious are expected to regularly read posts that proclaim them evil,
mentally defective, etc. and let the insults just slide off their backs.
Who expects that? Is that in the etiquette guidelines:
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
- Original Message -
From: Sonja van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED
At 09:33 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael Harney wrote:
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julia
doesn't use killfiles, certainly not on mailing lists
I would definately not killfile anyone on a list that I was moderating,
that much is
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Have I ever begun a post Look, punk...?
No, and you've never done the (highly irritating, IMO) thing of saying
Bzzt, thank you for playing or something similar, either.
Julia
___
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 09:33 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael Harney wrote:
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julia
doesn't use killfiles, certainly not on mailing lists
I would definately not
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who are
religious
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are
scientoligists and made
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
religious
- Original Message -
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Explanation
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:20:14 -0600
- Original Message -
From: Sonja van Baardwijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL
For the information of those who haven't been on the list for very long,
or who might not understand even though they have, the reason I do not
respond to JDG is that he and I have had several less than civilized
encounters and I decided after the last one (over a year ago) that the
list would
From New Scientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns3459
Black cats may be the more fortunate felines
18:19 04 March 03
Shaoni Bhattacharya
Black cats, a symbol of bad luck in many cultures, may be actually be more
fortunate than their fairer relatives. New research shows
--- Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From New Scientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns3459
Black cats may be the more fortunate felines
sniplet
Black cats, a symbol of bad luck in many cultures,
may be actually be more
fortunate than their fairer
76 matches
Mail list logo
