From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is an old boys club writ on a global
scale.
No backing for this. just becouse the above is true (if it is) does
not
mean
Coming Soon to a Galaxy Near You
DUCK DODGERS--NEW SERIES PREMIERE!
Saturday, August 23, at 11:30 a.m. (e/p)
Earth needs a hero. Until then, theres a duck. Dont miss the premiere
of Duck Dodgers, coming next month to Cartoon Network. Meet your captain
and get a sneak peek of the new show now at
Along the way to finding other stuff, I came across this:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2003/6/prweb67746.php
Since it's a press release, I think it's okay for me to post the whole darn
thing here...
--
Research Study on Extraterrestrial Infiltration of Clandestine Government
Organizations
A
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 05:17:09PM -0700, Jan Coffey wrote:
As a continuous policy it stinks, but to jumpstart a failing economy
it has worked in the past.
Only for a sufficiently vague definition of worked. Getting money into
the hands of
--- The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is an old boys club writ on a global
scale.
No backing for this. just
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- The Fool wrote:
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- The Fool wrote:
From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is an old boys club writ on a global
scale.
No backing for
I rode past four cows to day...I've never seen a skinny cow before. There
was feed available, and water and shelter; they must have been sick or part
of an experiment. Two of them had letters painted on them. You could see
their hip bones under the skin. Sorry for visual, but wow.
When I left
Robert,
You have been mixing References: headers between this thread and others
and it makes it harder for me to follow.
Sorry, I did not mean to. I reply to the digest, then remove the
digest's second address, so you do not receive two copies of the same
message, and I try
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 09:43:36PM +, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
I always reply to the digest. Presumably, all the threads in it are
for that digest. It is all one mail message.
I didn't expect that! The message I was replying to previously was about
the habitat, but it referenced a
Seriously, I don't know why I have become so involved. ... Do
I worry about my fellow man because I want there to be a fair
and clean world for my nephews?
Roy Rappaport pointed out, in `Ritual and Religion in the Making of
Humanity', which I am reading right now,
...
What is the heat conductivity of dirt, rock, and nickle-iron? Does
anyone one know?
Dirt and rock are similar, in the range 0.2 - 2 W / m K.
Iron is about 84 W / m K
Nickel is 92 W / m K
air at 300K is 0.026 W / m K
Thank you. Am I right in thinking that for air,
On Sunday 2003-07-20 14:36, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
trickle down: more money to the rich
The argument for giving more money to the rich than to the poor is
that the rich save more. (That is to say, they save a higher portion of
additional income; in
- Original Message -
From: Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Irregulars query: air pressure in spinning habitats
What is the heat conductivity of dirt, rock, and nickle-iron? Does
anyone one know?
At 10:12 PM 7/20/2003 +, you wrote:
What is the heat conductivity of dirt, rock, and nickle-iron? Does
anyone one know?
Dirt and rock are similar, in the range 0.2 - 2 W / m K.
Iron is about 84 W / m K
Nickel is 92 W / m K
air at 300K is 0.026 W / m K
Thank you.
Gautum wrote-
That's the name of a drill we use to sanity check
ideas. It's probably at the root of my frustration
over a lot of what's being discussed with regards to
Iraq.
What would you have to believe to believe that the
Bush Administration faked WMD evidence in order to
invade Iraq? In
From: Trent Shipley
In the US a huge problem with all 'trickle up' policies is that they require
legislative intervention. Laizie Faire (sp?) economic systems stabilize with
huge income and wealth disparities. In the US a combination of social
atomization (probably a result of
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: Religion based ethics
Dan Minette wrote:
One of the conclusions he accepted was the difficult position someone
with
his
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
... Debbi claims that there may be some as yet
unmeasurable by
science connection between her numinous experiences
and the rest of
the universe. Very similar to some claims of
astrology. I would not
have made the comparison if there were no
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:12:11PM +, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Thank you. Am I right in thinking that for air, this is the heat
conductivity for still air, and not the heat transfer capabilities of
moving air?
It is the thermal conductivity of air, which is almost the same whether
the
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 09:36:11PM +, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Hence, the government gets `more bang for the buck' by giving money to
the poor than the rich.
Yes, and if you look at GDP growth, it is greater with trickle up than
trickle down.
The counter argument is that a person with
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 09:54:24PM -0400, Kevin Tarr wrote:
What I'm trying to come around to: trickle up for good or evil has
been in place seventy years,
In different degrees. The democrats tend to tilt it towards more
progressive taxation, and the Republicans toward less progressive
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 08:12:30PM -0700, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Let me give an example of 'phenomena that had been investigated for
centuries' to no avail, until after the proper equipment was invented
and the phenomenon was explained scientifically: blood circulation.
Bad example. While the
At 11:10 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This actually a JDG
style arguement. The things that conservatives and
replubicans do are right and moral because republicans are right and moral
which of course means that anything they do is right and moral.
Actually, this is a Bob Z.
At 07:35 AM 7/19/2003 -0700 Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Frankly, Ray, I think that I'm showing a lot more
respect for people on the list who disagree with me
than most of the people on this list are showing to
me. The difference is that I'm in the minority, so it
just looks different.
One of the
At 11:40 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would not be a bad thing if the administration was honest about its
intentions and motives. It seems clear that the WMD arguement was used
since it was thought to be the one that would most easy to sell to the
american public (Wolfowitz or
At 11:27 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gautam, I am actually quite fearful for our country at the moment. The
current government is doing all that it can to insure its control of the US
for years and decades to come. It is using means that I find at least
objectionable if not
At 11:10 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Government enters war without being attacked based on claim that the
opponent has WMD. Information comes to light that these claims are false.
Actually, a large part of the justification for te war was based on the
fact that Iraq was
At 08:07 PM 7/18/2003 -0700 Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Had you
told me, on September 12th, that _no_ significant
terrorist attack on the United States would be
launched in the one and a half years after the attack,
I would have told you that such a suggestion was
absurd.
I believe that you meant no
At 10:05 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 David Hobby wrote:
Since his actions are producing the conditions for
MORE terrorism rather than less, this is asking a bit much.
On what basis do you make this claim?
Given that one of Al-Qaeda's primary recruiting tools was US presence in
the Holy Land
Erik Reuter wrote:
This is quite shaky reasoning.
Certainly. That doesn't make it unlikely though. Besides, how many solid
ideas do you think Saddam ever managed to come up with? :)
Why would Saddam destroy the weapons at all?
Insert the obligatory warning about sheer speculation...and
John D. Giorgis wrote:
One of the original principles of this List is that it should be open to
rough-and-tumble adult conservation. So long as Gautam is employing a
semblance of rasoning and attempting to engage in constructive discussion,
I think that there is nothing wrong with him being
At 09:14 PM 7/17/2003 -0400 David Hobby wrote:
Is a general pattern of making misleading statements on
similar subjects admissable evidence?
On the other hand, his administration has been succeeding
in misleading most of the American public for years, and finally
got called on it.
At 05:37 PM 7/17/2003 -0700 Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Furthermore, Bob, you're much too smart to believe
something as dumb as that the world of intelligence is
quite as clear as whether Bill Clinton had sex with
Monica Lewinsky.
Which of course is what this all about.So many Democrats turned a
At 01:07 PM 7/18/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote:
Criticize him?!? If Bush had really lied to Congress so he could initiate
an unjustified war, it would be more appropriate for us to push for his
*impeachment* and felony prosecution under US law. Time will tell.
Huh?
Surely if the Bush
At 10:48 AM 7/18/2003 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote:
When is it acceptable to criticize the administration regarding
justification for a war?
Sorry Nick, but if you can find me someone who thought that the British
reports of Iraqi atempts to acquire uranium in Africa was the lynchpin of
the war
At 12:24 AM 7/18/2003 + Robert J. Chassell wrote:
No, not quite. If my memory serves me right, US President Bush did
not say that the `British said'. Instead, Bush said that the `British
learned'. There is a difference. In everyday language, people do not
say of others that they learned a
Here's part of a New York Times article, covering claims that
strong enforcement of laws against homosexuality first began
about 100 years ago in America.
Interesting, but I'm not convinced. Comments?
---David
In a message dated 7/20/2003 10:25:49 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here's part of a New York Times article, covering claims that
strong enforcement of laws against homosexuality first began
about 100 years ago in America.
Interesting, but I'm not convinced.
38 matches
Mail list logo
