[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: Here's a true story; I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions. One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health. She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my scepticism. Your story proves nothing. At the very least it proves that this Maharishi trained jyotishee was a charlatan. The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise it is of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many difficult levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. This is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter whos father and father before him passed on all those small details that makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like for example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have to take your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream once you entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic tradition. I have many excellent artists in my family, but no photographers, I wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-) To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly should have been able to see. The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours spent months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, flunked ? Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi in his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and payed all the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having so freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of their lifetime. So presumably, the jyotishee my friend saw passed the test. Most probably not. This is a problem for me because this guy was sent by MMY to offer expensive services, including chart readings, gem recomendations, yagyas and it was rubbish. He even told someone that tuesday is a bad day to be stung by bees! To a bunch of people who already believed he was probbaly great but to a sceptic who needs abit of convincing it was a dreadfulparlour act, Randi would have loved him. I was the only dissenting voice too, until my friend with the health problem got her maonmey back. And it was me who pointed out that he was saying broadly the same stuff to everyone. The whole thing was shameless. Mind you, that was the course I found out that saying grace before eating cancels out the negative effects of GM foods. Snake oil from start to finish.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: I was watching a film clip on UTube last night which featured a Physics Professor Kaku from New York City University. He stated that, at the present time, there appears to be no evidence of any civilizations in the galaxy that have achieved mastery over nature. Physicists are using a classification system with the following achievement value: Class 1- a civilization that has achieved mastery in using the available resources in its own planet. Class 2 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the Sun, after exhausting the energy resources in its own planet. Class 3 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the galaxy, after exhausting its reliance on the Sun. Using this criteria, the professor believed that the Earth is Class Zero since the civilization of Earth is still relying on fossil fuels for its enery resource. In science fiction speak, Class 2 civilizations would be equivalent to the Star Trek spacefarers. Class 3 civilizations would be equivalent to the Empire in Star Wars. What is 'civilization'? Is it better to have a billion ignorant people go into outer space, living in extra-terrestrial shopping malls, scratching around on the barren rocks they discover, and to boldly go where no ignaramous has gone before? Or is it better to have a few billion enlightened people living in tune with nature on Earth, nurturing the heart and soul of the inner spirit of life, and expanding the mind to its full self-sufficient invincible capacity? I'd be happy with either scenario, but it looks like we're gonna have to make do with a few billion bozos stuck on earth scratching around on the barren rocks we're creating here.
[FairfieldLife] Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? JR
[FairfieldLife] Re: How Racist Are You? -- The Game
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So. How racist are you? That's the question asked by an online psychology test by the University of Chicago. The test involves showing you a series of photographs of 100 black or white men, either holding guns or cellphones. You have to decide - in a split second - whether to shoot them or to holster your gun. Go to: http://www.neatorama.com/2008/04/27/how-racist-are-you/ ** Marek's Score: 460 (I ended up shooting some guys with cellphones.) Average reaction time: Black Armed:685.92ms Black Unarmed:775.16ms White Armed:647.76ms White Unarmed:723.6ms Great fun, My score seems to indicate I'm the Shoot first ask questions later type of guy. Hugo's Score: -125 Average reaction time: Black Armed:784.64ms Black Unarmed:837.84ms White Armed:760.92ms White Unarmed:834.4ms It seems to imply I'm only a teeny bit more likely to shoot an armed black guy, but it's mainly a pretty good argument for keeping guns illegal in England. But then I wouldn't go out armed with a keyboard with, effectively, two triggers. And people aren't likely to be demanding my wallet while armed with a mobile phone. So maybe it all works itself out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To All: I was watching a film clip on UTube last night which featured a Physics Professor Kaku from New York City University. He stated that, at the present time, there appears to be no evidence of any civilizations in the galaxy that have achieved mastery over nature. Physicists are using a classification system with the following achievement value: Class 1- a civilization that has achieved mastery in using the available resources in its own planet. Class 2 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the Sun, after exhausting the energy resources in its own planet. Class 3 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the galaxy, after exhausting its reliance on the Sun. Using this criteria, the professor believed that the Earth is Class Zero since the civilization of Earth is still relying on fossil fuels for its enery resource. In science fiction speak, Class 2 civilizations would be equivalent to the Star Trek spacefarers. Class 3 civilizations would be equivalent to the Empire in Star Wars. Stephen Hawking has a good explanation for why there are apparently no species more technologically advanced than we are. This year scientists are switching on the largest particle accelarator yet, in an attempt to re-create the condition of the universe just after the big-bang. There is an outside possibility that causing this much energy will destroy the universe, that's right, destroy the universe, create another big-bang! As it's impossible to know beforehand that this is going to happen we are happy to give it a go in a spirit of inquiry. Now, suppose that in order to become a super advanced civilisation you have to go through the inquisitive stage of theory and experiment, you will need to build a machine like that at CERN laboratories. Maybe, every time a species got this far they would destroy everything. So, perhaps we are as advanced as anyone is likely to get. I reckon that in order to get as far as we have you need to have had a carboniferous period in your planets evolution. This is by no means predictable as we could have evolved long before we did and the several hundred million years of trees dying and being buried by changing sea levels might not have happened before we got here, which would leave us never evolving further than the bronze age, if that. It is only because the amount of energy we get from fossil fuels has made us so comfortable that we have the time, raw materials, plastics etc and excess power to look for big science concepts like the Higgs particle. We could be the only ones ever who are looking for the Higgs Goddam particle and we owe it all to dead trees. Far out.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones.
[FairfieldLife] Clinton supporter invited Wright
Clinton supporter invited Wright Obama's campaign has disavowed Wright's media tour, and a correspondent notes an interesting detail: Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton. The Tribune reports that Wright was invited by Barbara Reynolds, a former USA Today editorial board member who has written on personal blog of her support for Clinton. I don't mean to suggest some kind of plot. Her agenda here seems to have been the same as Wright's: To protect the minister's reputation from, among others, Obama. [I]t is a sad testimony that to protect his credentials as aunifier above the fray the Senator is fueling the mediacharacterization that Rev. Dr. Wright is some retiring old uncle in thechurch basement instead of respecting Wright for the towering astutefather of progressive social and global causes that he is, Reynolds wrote in March. Reynolds' is well placed to defend Wright. Her bio says she teaches prophetic ministry and the media at Howard University's divinity school. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
Thanks for clarifying, Turq. Your emphasis is on the working part of the deal, not the everyone part. Got it. Vanity Fair was not one of the 8 fashion magazines I looked at. Since I value your perspective, I browsed around online. Please understand that in order to make a real judgment I'd have to hold the mag in my hand. There are some subtle things about magazine styling that I look for as far as good mindfood, and it goes beyond individual articles or columns. It has to do with the overall feel of is this mag a tool of information or of manipulation? The mag Forbes FYI, not a fashion mag at all, is on my anti-mind list because the overall presentation is manipulative and destructive to the reader (imo). So, looking at Vanity Fair: their About Us page says, From world affairs to entertainment, business to fashion, crime to society, Vanity Fair is a cultural catalyst that drives the popular dialogue globally. So fashion is at best 1/6 of their emphasis. They consider themselves to be a cultural catalyst. Their 2 topic tabs on the home page are Culture; Politics Power. I compared this to what I call fashion magazines. These are the first 3 I looked up. None of these had an About Us page, so I used their subscribe page instead. Allure: Allure is the beauty expert. ~ from the subscribe page. Their 5 topic tabs are Beauty reporter; Trends; How-to's; Salon spa directory; Makeovers. Vogue: Their web address is www.style.com http://www.style.com , which says a lot about their emphasis. Their first 5 topic tabs are Fashion show; News trends; People parties; Shopping; Beauty. Cosmopolitan: Fun Fearless Female is their subtitle on the subscribe page. Their 7 topic tabs are Sex love; Style beauty; Hot guys; Celebs gossip; You, you, you; Fun games; Cosmolicious. From this, I might classify Vanity Fair as a news magazine, the same topical classification as People magazine or Time. I still don't know if I'd consider it healthy mindfood, but it's not a fashion magazine. --- TurquoiseB wrote: --- ispiritkin wrote: I said it because a number of people were displaying attachment to systems that they personally believe work for everyone. I do not share that belief. snip No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that they work as advertised. I have a counterexample: I looked at 8 fashion magazines. They were unhealthy exposure as a steady diet for the mind. THEREFORE ... I don't expect to see a fashion magazine that is good mindfood. Bad example. Vanity Fair can be considered a fashion magazine, and it prints some of the best mindfood in the publishing industry.
[FairfieldLife] 'Rudy should not receive communion?'
NEW YORK - Rudy Giulianishould not have received Holy Communion during the pope's visit becausethe former presidential candidate supports abortion rights, New York Cardinal Edward Egan said Monday. Egan says he had an understanding with Giuliani that he is not to receive the Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is a grave offense against the will of God, Egan said. The cardinal said Monday that Giuliani broke that understanding when he received the Eucharist during Pope Benedict XVI'svisit earlier this month. He received Communion during the April 19service from one of the many clergymen who offered the sacrament. Egan says he will be seeking a meeting with Giuliani to insist that he abide by our understanding. Giuliani's spokeswoman, Sunny Mindel, said Monday that he is willing to meet with the cardinal but added that his faith is a deeply personal matter and should remain confidential. Egan's statement does not address the fact that Giuliani is on his third marriage. Catholics who divorce and remarry without getting an annulment from the church cannot receive Communion. A spokesman for Egan said that the cardinal referred to the abortion issue rather than to Giuliani's marital history because the agreement that Giuliani would not receive Communion pre-dated his divorce from his second wife, Donna Hanover. Giuliani's first marriage was annulled based on the fact that he and his wife were second cousins once removed. Giuliani married Hanover in 1984 and they divorced in 2002, while he was New York's mayor. He has been married to the former Judith Nathan since 2003. Communion and abortion rights became a storyline in 2004, when Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a Catholic, came under scrutiny for supporting abortion rights in conflict with church teaching. Egan's criticism of Giuliani, however, is a rare case of a Catholic bishop criticizing a public figure by name. Most bishops who spoke about Communion and the responsibility of Catholic politicians did so in general terms without naming names. Kerry's own archbishop, Sean O'Malley of Boston, endorsed the principle without naming the senator. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html
[FairfieldLife] Barbie the Infidel
OK, how about instead of bombing them, we just drop toys and video games? Operation Santa Claus we could call it. And what about Ken? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7371771.stm Iran calls for ban on Barbie doll Iran's top prosecutor has called for restrictions in the import of Western toys, saying they have a destructive effect on the country's youth. The Prosecutor General, Ghorban Ali Dori Najafabadi, said that toys such as Barbie, Batman, and Harry Potter would have negative social consequences. Mr Najafabadi wants measures taken to protect what he called Iran's Islamic culture and revolutionary values. Correspondents say Western culture is becoming increasingly popular in Iran.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
On Apr 29, 2008, at 1:40 AM, hugheshugo wrote: Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. LOL. Quote of the week, Hugo. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Re: Barbie the Infidel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, how about instead of bombing them, we just drop toys and video games? Operation Santa Claus we could call it. And what about Ken? Fuck Ken. Drop Little Debbie products upon their toweled heads and they'll be our friends forever. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7371771.stm Iran calls for ban on Barbie doll Iran's top prosecutor has called for restrictions in the import of Western toys, saying they have a destructive effect on the country's youth. The Prosecutor General, Ghorban Ali Dori Najafabadi, said that toys such as Barbie, Batman, and Harry Potter would have negative social consequences. Mr Najafabadi wants measures taken to protect what he called Iran's Islamic culture and revolutionary values. Correspondents say Western culture is becoming increasingly popular in Iran.
[FairfieldLife] Global Warming totalitarianism
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5736103.html April 28, 2008, 12:47PM Storm brewing for William Gray Hurricane forecaster says his dispute with school focuses on global warming debate By ERIC BERGER Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle By pioneering the science of seasonal hurricane forecasting and teaching 70 graduate students who now populate the National Hurricane Center and other research outposts, William Gray turned a city far from the stormy seas into a hurricane research mecca. But now the institution in Fort Collins, Colo., where he has worked for nearly half a century, has told Gray it may end its support of his seasonal forecasting. As he enters his 25th year of predicting hurricane season activity, Colorado State University officials say handling media inquiries related to Gray's forecasting requires too much time and detracts from efforts to promote other professors' work. But Gray, a highly visible and sometimes acerbic skeptic of climate change, says that's a flimsy excuse for the real motivation a desire to push him aside because of his global warming criticism. Among other comments, Gray has said global warming scientists are brainwashing our children. Now an emeritus professor, Gray declined to comment on the university's possible termination of promotional support. But a memo he wrote last year, after CSU officials informed him that media relations would no longer promote his forecasts after 2008, reveals his views: This is obviously a flimsy excuse and seems to me to be a cover for the Department's capitulation to the desires of some (in their own interest) who want to reign (sic) in my global warming and global warming-hurricane criticisms, Gray wrote to Dick Johnson, head of CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, and others. The university may have moderated its stance since last year. Officials said late last week that they intend to support the release of Gray's forecasts as long as they continue to be co-authored by Phil Klotzbach, a former student of Gray's who earned his doctorate last summer, and as long as Klotzbach remains at CSU. When Klotzbach leaves, he will either produce the seasonal forecasts at his new position, or end them altogether. Not only does this internal dispute reveal a bit of acrimony at the end of Gray's long career at CSU; it highlights the politically charged atmosphere that surrounds global warming in the United States. Bill Gray has come under a lot of fire for his views, said Channel 11 meteorologist Neil Frank, a former director of the National Hurricane Center and a friend of Gray's. If, indeed, this is happening, it would be really sad that Colorado State is trying to rein in Bill Gray. CSU officials insist that is not the case. The dean of the College of Engineering, which oversees atmospheric sciences, said she spoke with Gray about terminating media support for his forecasts solely because of the strain it placed on the college's sole media staffer. It really has nothing to do with his stand on global warming, said the dean, Sandra Woods. He's a great faculty member. He's an institution at CSU. According to Woods, Gray's forecasts require about 10 percent of the time a media support staff member, Emily Wilmsen, has available for the College of Engineering and its 104 faculty members. A professor of public relations at Boston University, Donald Wright, questioned why the university would want to pull back its support for Gray now, after he has published his forecasts for a quarter-century. It's seems peculiar that this is happening now, Wright said. Given the national reputation that these reports have, you would think the university would want to continue to promote these forecasts. Gray, he said, seems to deliver a lot of publicity bang for the buck. The seasonal forecasts are printed in newspapers around the country and splashed across the World Wide Web. There also seems to be little question that prominent climate scientists have complained to CSU about Gray's vocal skepticism. The head of CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Dick Johnson, said he has received many comments during recent years about Gray some supportive, and some not. The complaints have come as Gray became increasingly involved in the global warming debate. His comments toward adversaries often are biting and adversarial. In 2005, when Georgia Tech scientist Peter Webster co-authored a paper suggesting global warming had caused a spike in major hurricanes, Gray labeled him and others medicine men who were misleading the public. Webster, in an e-mail from Bangladesh, where is working on a flood prediction project, acknowledged that he complained to Johnson at CSU. My only conversation with Dick Johnson, which followed a rather nasty series of jabs from Gray, suggested that Bill should be persuaded to lay off the personal and stay scientific, Webster wrote. Gray also has been
[FairfieldLife] Demography Is King (Obama and Clinton Voters)
The non-college educated not only earn less, they smoke more, grow more obese and die sooner. Btw, does that includes MIU grads? It would be kind of ironic if Hill wins by attracting (pandering to ?) this group -- only to have them die off with 4 years and fewer left to support her second term. Maybe we need two presidents -- one of reck-neckania and the other of snootyville. Demography Is King By DAVID BROOKS Published: April 29, 2008 Fifty-five years ago, 80 percent of American television viewers, young and old, tuned in to see Milton Berle on Tuesday nights. Tens of millions, rich and poor, worked together at Elks Lodges and Rotary Clubs. Millions more, rural and urban, read general-interest magazines like Look and Life. In those days, the owner of the local bank lived in the same town as the grocery clerk, and their boys might play on the same basketball team. Only 7 percent of adult Americans had a college degree. David Brooks Go to Columnist Page » But that's all changed. In the decades since, some social divides, mostly involving ethnicity, have narrowed. But others, mostly involving education, have widened. Today there is a mass educated class. The college educated and non-college educated are likely to live in different towns. They have radically different divorce rates and starkly different ways of raising their children. The non-college educated not only earn less, they smoke more, grow more obese and die sooner. Retailers, home builders and TV executives identify and reinforce these lifestyle clusters. There are more niche offerings and fewer common experiences. The ensuing segmentation has reshaped politics. We're used to the ideological divide between Red and Blue America. This year's election has revealed a deep cultural gap within the Democratic Party, separating what Stuart Rothenberg calls the two Democratic parties. In state after state (Wisconsin being the outlier), Barack Obama has won densely populated, well-educated areas. Hillary Clinton has won less-populated, less-educated areas. For example, Obama has won roughly 70 percent of the most-educated counties in the primary states. Clinton has won 90 percent of the least-educated counties. In state after state, Obama has won a few urban and inner-ring suburban counties. Clinton has won nearly everywhere else. This social divide has overshadowed regional differences. Sixty-year-old, working-class Catholics vote the same, whether they live in Fresno, Scranton, Nashua or Orlando. The divide has even overshadowed campaigning. Surely the most interesting feature of the Democratic race is how unimportant political events are. The candidates can spend tens of millions of dollars on advertising, but they are not able to sway their opponent's voters to their side. They can win a stunning victory, but the momentum doesn't carry over from state to state. They can make horrific gaffes, deliver brilliant speeches, turn in good or bad debate performances, but these things do not alter the race. In Pennsylvania, Obama did everything conceivable to win over Clinton's working-class voters. The effort was a failure. The great uniter failed to unite. In this election, persuasion isn't important. Social identity is everything. Demography is king. Over the years, different theories have emerged to describe the educated/less-educated divide. Conservatives have gravitated toward the culture war narrative, dividing the country between the wholesome masses and the decadent cultural elites. Some liberals believe income inequality drives everything. They wait for an uprising of economic populism. Other liberals divide the country morally, between the enlightened urbanites and the racist rednecks who will never vote for a black man. None of these theories really fit the facts. It's more accurate to say that the country has simply drifted apart into different subcultures. There's no great hostility between the cultures. Americans have a fuzzy sense of where the boundaries lie. But people in different niches have developed different unconscious maps of reality. They have developed different communal understandings of what constitutes a good leader, of what sort of world they live in. They have developed different communal definitions, which they can't even articulate, of what they mean by liberty, security and virtue. Demographic groups have begun to function like tribes or cultures. We can all play the parlor game of trying to figure out why Obama, a Harvard Law grad, resonates with the more educated while Clinton, a Yale Law grad, resonates with the less educated. I'd throw in that Obama's offer of a secular crusade hits a nerve among his fellow bobos, while Clinton's talk of fighting and resilience plays well down market. But these theories only scratch the surface. The mental maps people in different cultures form are infinitely complex and poorly understood even by those who hold them. People pick up millions of subtle signals from
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
Richard, I'm starting to feel like Ronald Regan over here when I say to you, There you go again. The Earth is bombarded -- and bombarded is exactly the correct term -- by cosmic particles and rays. These things arrive here at speeds that are so high that the new accelerator you're afraid of is a comparatively -- no exaggeration now -- a puny little affair indeed. Trillions upon trillions of stuff-n-bits bombard our atmosphere every second, and most of these collisions are impacts of greater risk than anything that will happen in the new accelerator -- which is doing about one such bombardment event per experiment. The cosmos should have created a new big bang by now, donchatink? There isn't a physicist on the planet who will disagree with the above. As soon as they turn that thing on, I predict they'll say, Oops, we need an even more powerful machine -- anyone got a few billion dollars laying around, cuz now we know we need to try to create the higgypiggy-wiggedout-stringystrung-boffobozo particle. And Hawkings' recent statement about extraterrestrial life did NOT assert that we are the only intelligent life in our galaxy or that there was a good explanation for this unproved assertion of yours, Richard. Those concepts are merely being bandied about as mental-nastics. Hawkings knows that there's a huge number of possible explanations for Fermi's Paradox, and that today's science is merely scratching the surface of this great mystery. Also, keep in mind that Hawkings has written things that later he's come to disavow -- why? -- cuz he's a WORKING scientist who is gathering ever more data and refining or even wholly changing his views.like ALL scientists are expected to do. His theories about black holes have undergone a very significant evolution, for instance. You would benefit greatly by reading this about the Drake Equation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation While doing so, keep in mind that this equation is itself an evolving thing and has changed significantly as new data comes in. For instance, your concept about we gotta have coal before we can evolve is something that would be plugged into the Drake equation as a statistical probability. With the Drake equation, we can see the number of intelligent civilizations of our galaxy is computed to be very low: 10. Yikes, eh? But keep in mind that our galaxy is one amongst billions of other galaxies, so the number of intelligent civilizations for the whole universe rockets up to billions of such civilizations. Consider that our planet has only been around for five billion years and that our sun is a second-hand star made up of material from other stars that already lived their billions-of-year-long lives and then blew themselves up. This means that, say, about half of all the intelligent civilizations formed before our sun was even born -- how ancient would their sciences be, eh? How godlike would those minds be, eh? All the above is merely a few words about incredibly complex notions -- I study astronomy about an hour a day, and I don't know jack compared to even an astronomy majored undergrad sophomore. Conclusions are extraordinarily rare, but the science is very exacting and richly detailed. I encourage you to do more reading, so that I don't have to think of Ronny any more than I have to. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: I was watching a film clip on UTube last night which featured a Physics Professor Kaku from New York City University. He stated that, at the present time, there appears to be no evidence of any civilizations in the galaxy that have achieved mastery over nature. Physicists are using a classification system with the following achievement value: Class 1- a civilization that has achieved mastery in using the available resources in its own planet. Class 2 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the Sun, after exhausting the energy resources in its own planet. Class 3 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the galaxy, after exhausting its reliance on the Sun. Using this criteria, the professor believed that the Earth is Class Zero since the civilization of Earth is still relying on fossil fuels for its enery resource. In science fiction speak, Class 2 civilizations would be equivalent to the Star Trek spacefarers. Class 3 civilizations would be equivalent to the Empire in Star Wars. Stephen Hawking has a good explanation for why there are apparently no species more technologically advanced than we are. This year scientists are switching on the largest particle accelarator yet, in an attempt to re-create the condition of the universe just after the big-bang. There is an outside possibility that causing this much energy will destroy the universe, that's right, destroy
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. --- Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which method is most like TMO Research? (HINT: there are only two possible answers.)  Yeah, the Scientific Method is purely black and white and allows no middle ground of convergence towards a better model... snort Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Clinton supporter invited Wright
I like Rev Wright and believe he is speaking the truth in the tradition of Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim, Eckhart Tolle, and, of course, Jesus, Budha, as well as many other teachers of the One Universal Truth of Love Peace and egolessness. I believe America and the world needs a lot more courageous people like Rev Wright. In my view these are the Real Patriots through whom we hear actually the voice of God. I feel very sad that not more people have the courage to speak the Real Truth of God's Love Peace and egolessness. Perhaps, Rev Wright can step up and follow in the footsteps of Jesus, Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim and other preachers of Truth. Not that Rev Wright has not done enough good already compared to the rest of us. Perhaps, this is more important then Obama becoming President. Perhaps, it would be a better contrast to have Hillary or McCain as President doing the same old politics and Rev Wright speaking to the Universal Truths of of God's Love Peace and egolessness. thanks for listening, anatol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clinton supporter invited Wright Obama's campaign has disavowed Wright's media tour, and a correspondent notes an interesting detail: Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton. ..
[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, ispiritkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for clarifying, Turq. .. Since I value your perspective, Its OK. The bad transit on your natal mercury and sun will pass. Clarity will return. :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. And by the time you hit 30 or so, you may have something that is statistically significant. --- Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Maharishi?????????
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: On Apr 28, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Duveyoung wrote: Got a link to that video? Edg http://www.arunachala.org/bookstall/videos/ The Sage of Arunachala - The Life and Times of Sri Ramana Maharshi  In this seventy-three-minute, professionally-produced documentary, the unique life and teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi are artistically unfolded in a chronology of photographs, interviews, narration and archival film footage. Follow the Sage from his birth in a small South Indian village to his final mortal day, as grieving crowds push in from all sides to have their last darshan. Released after a two year effort of archival film restoration, interviews, research and travel. Narrated by John Flynn, a nationally recognized television and film talent. Edited by James Hartel, and music by internationally famous artists. 73 min, narrated, color, music DVD $20.00 video clip It's been posted to Google Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7390375386934930566hl=en Thank you for that, Alex. I just finished watching it. What a wonderful and powerful example of a genuine saint! Thank you again for posting this link.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: good interview with Rev. Wright
Things I did not know before. Reverend Jeramaih Wright Reverend Wright is a scholar Reverend Wright is Marine Vet War Hero Reverend Wright was a medical tech that was allowed to work on the President of the United States. Reverend Wright knows his Bible. Reverend Wright is not a hater of white people or of American Instead Rev Wright loves America he is a lover of persons Rev Wright is against the same things WE are against Rev. Wright is CORRECT Rev . Wright is not a guy who is just spouting words without the ability to back them up. Rev. Wright is Charming Rev Wright is a true minister. If Rev. Wright were Obama'a mentor Obama may be better not worse. One thing I can say for all the Hillary lovers Barack tendancy to denounce may end up the same as Al Gores choice to distance himself from Bill Clinton. Although Hillary may have to distance herself from Bill Clinton soon Barack Obama may have been premature in denouncing Wright. To say that the laws of Karma are always working is not wrong it is Wright. the last couple of days of Rev Wright were very informative. Even John McCain had very positive things to say about him. I have not heard Hillary's comments yet they will probably want to sweep him under the rug. In anycase Keep on Keepin On Reverend Wright I am glad you choose to be an active servant of the Lord.. Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for answering the somewhat grouchy question about why the interview is worth watching in its own right. I guess Lawson didn't see the word also in my sentence or connect with its import. --- satvadude108 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander wrote: Here's an interview with the Rev Wright that also gives you the context of that Damn America sound bite. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com The entire sermon, or at least a good portion, is available via youtube, so I don't know why you need an interview to get the full context. Lawson Watch the show and find out Lawson. It was interesting to see the connections Rev. Wright had with Bill Moyers going back over 40 years. The 45 minutes I spent watching it as it aired last Friday was well spent and thought provoking. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which method is most like TMO Research? (HINT: there are only two possible answers.) Let's hope the answer isn't (a): Here are the facts. What conclusions can we draw from them. That'd be naive inductivism, no?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Pastor Casts a Shadow
amarnath wrote: Perhaps, this is more important then Obama becoming President. 'For Senator Obama, the re-emergence of Rev. Wright has been devastating. The senator has been trying desperately to bolster his standing with skeptical and even hostile white working-class voters. When the story line of the campaign shifts almost entirely to the race-in-your-face antics of someone like Mr. Wright, Mr. Obama's chances can only suffer. Read more: 'The Pastor Casts a Shadow' By Bob Herbert New York Times, Op-Ed, April 29, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/435zpp
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Angela, I think Laws of Form and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions are about all one needs to see how challenging it is to be a knower of reality. First of all, no one with less than, say, 140 I.Q. can even understand the math of Laws let alone apply those truths to the soft disciplines, and secondly, no one can overcome the problem of waiting for old farts to die without having extraordinary charisma or other rare thingie going for them. Hawking's disability may have actually helped him have more street cred since he obviously was virtually possessed with a desire for truth and, well, he not only didn't have anything better to do, it was the ONLY thing he could do. (...ignoring his divorces, his love/hate relationships with his helpers, etc. but of course.) Einstein et al were brains as rare as lottery wins, and even so, they took decades to get their ideas out there and being taught to the masses. If Einstein and Bohr were alive today, they'd still be hacking at each other's theories by rolling Hawkings' wheelchair viciously back and forth in a game of pong between them. And then, of course, no matter the size of the intellect, nukes get invented and used, death rays get invented and used, and on and on -- high I.Q. seems to have almost no correlation with morality, and hey, toss in the gifted artists of the world and there's no correlation with morality there either -- Hitler was not a bad artist, Nero could play the violin! (ahem.) I still love Maharishi's saying, Getting a PhD is no guarantee -- one could still be insane. Indeed, many mad scientists WERE insane -- Cavendish could not stand the presence of a woman -- though he employed many in his household -- would fire any woman on the spot if he bumped into one mistakenly in his manse. Yet he weighed the Earth itself and discovered Hydrogen. And Fritz Haber, a nobel prize winner, invented a new and wonderful method for Germany to make poison gas and is rightly called the father of chemical warfare. Later, when he fled Nazi Germany and landed in England, the welcoming group of famous scientists refused to shake his hand alone of all the other scientists who escaped Germany in the same boat as Haber. Issac Asimov said, Science has known sin now. And inside this box, right here, is a cat. There's no way to tell if the cat is alive or dead unless you open the box. And whether or not we can ever know the answer without opening the box is a problem that divides physics right down the middle even today. Sigh. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. --- Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
Louis McKenzie wrote: Rev. Wright is not a guy who is just spouting words without the ability to back them up. 'America's chickens are coming home to roost sermon. Wright said that America had taken its land by terror from the Indians; had enslaved Africans; had bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki (weren't we in a death struggle with Japan, which had attacked Pearl Harbor?); had bombed Iraq, Sudan and Panama; and had backed state-supported terrorism against the Palestinians. Moyers's question after this diatribe: When people saw the sound bites from it this year, they thought you were blaming America. Did you somehow fail to communicate? Thought he was blaming America? Where did anyone get that idea? Read more: 'The Wright Comeback Tour' By Howard Kurtz Washington Post, Tuesday, April 29, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/5onycf
[FairfieldLife] Re: the gift that keeps on giving
Lawson wrote: I agree with the apparent concensus of the American community of protestant ministers in the USA who count him as one of the most articulate American Christian ministers of his generation. Even if it costs Obama the Dem nomination? It puts Obama in a corner. He's made some negative comments about (Wright), but not totally disassociated himself with him, said Gardner. Now ... there's a tough decision ahead - he has to say he made a terrible mistake by staying in the congregation for 20 years, and he didn't realize what a nutcase (Wright) was, or he'll have to ignore it, he said. Either way, it takes Obama out of his uplifting change message ... and into the politics as usual corner, said Gardner. But for the GOP, it's the gift that keeps on giving. Read more: 'Pastor making life hard for Obama' Carla Marinucci S.F. Chronicle, Tuesday, April 29, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/4r8tpj
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
On Apr 29, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Richard M wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which method is most like TMO Research? (HINT: there are only two possible answers.) Let's hope the answer isn't (a): Here are the facts. What conclusions can we draw from them. That'd be naive inductivism, no? Only if it was not falsifiable.
[FairfieldLife] I bet you think this campaign is about you
By the time Mr. Wright had finished speaking, he had proved Mr. Axelrod's point. And also one made by Chuck Todd, the NBC political director who summed up Mr. Wright's apologia by paraphrasing a Carly Simon song: You're so vain, I bet you think this campaign is about you. Read more: 'Not Speaking for Obama, Pastor Speaks for Himself, at Length' By Alessandra Stanley New York Times, April 29, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/5945pw
[FairfieldLife] Re: Clinton supporter invited Wright
It might, indeed, be worth it if Wright ruins Obama's chances. I'm praying that Obama is wearing a mask to keep his head above this fray, but truth be told, he's put black angst on the backburner -- for the eventual greater good of blacks, we hope, but we know history too, and Obama's heart may not matter once he actually gets into office and then finds out how the gears in the smoked filled back room grind to a halt if not oiled heavily with pork grease. Whoopi Goldberg said on The View a few days ago that maybe we should vote for McCain since it was his party that got us into the Iraq mess, and so, that party should take the blame as the war continues until finally it has to answer to the American public for it and has to enact laws that will penalize those corporations that profited from war so that they can be taxed enough to pay the three trillion dollar debt of the war. Like that. Makes sense -- ugly ugly sense. I hate the concept, but.h. And hey, better that Wright is getting all the air-time instead of Sharpton who is making war cries of shut down the city. And meanwhile we have Rush hoping for riots in Denver. GAWD, eh? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like Rev Wright and believe he is speaking the truth in the tradition of Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim, Eckhart Tolle, and, of course, Jesus, Budha, as well as many other teachers of the One Universal Truth of Love Peace and egolessness. I believe America and the world needs a lot more courageous people like Rev Wright. In my view these are the Real Patriots through whom we hear actually the voice of God. I feel very sad that not more people have the courage to speak the Real Truth of God's Love Peace and egolessness. Perhaps, Rev Wright can step up and follow in the footsteps of Jesus, Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim and other preachers of Truth. Not that Rev Wright has not done enough good already compared to the rest of us. Perhaps, this is more important then Obama becoming President. Perhaps, it would be a better contrast to have Hillary or McCain as President doing the same old politics and Rev Wright speaking to the Universal Truths of of God's Love Peace and egolessness. thanks for listening, anatol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert babajii_99@ wrote: Clinton supporter invited Wright Obama's campaign has disavowed Wright's media tour, and a correspondent notes an interesting detail: Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton. ..
[FairfieldLife] *Arctic* hom in the Vedas!
Just got Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak's book from India: http://www.gypsii.com/place.cgi?op=viewid=78901
[FairfieldLife] Re: mind is mad/insane
like Amma says: anyone who has a mind/ego is mad/insane because the mind/ego is madness/insanity that's the nature of the egoic mind ! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela, I think Laws of Form and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions are about all one needs to see how challenging it is to be a knower of reality. First of all, no one with less than, say, 140 I.Q. can even understand the math of Laws let alone apply those truths to the soft disciplines, and secondly, no one can overcome the problem of waiting for old farts to die without having extraordinary charisma or other rare thingie going for them. Hawking's disability may have actually helped him have more street cred since he obviously was virtually possessed with a desire for truth and, well, he not only didn't have anything better to do, it was the ONLY thing he could do. (...ignoring his divorces, his love/hate relationships with his helpers, etc. but of course.) Einstein et al were brains as rare as lottery wins, and even so, they took decades to get their ideas out there and being taught to the masses. If Einstein and Bohr were alive today, they'd still be hacking at each other's theories by rolling Hawkings' wheelchair viciously back and forth in a game of pong between them. And then, of course, no matter the size of the intellect, nukes get invented and used, death rays get invented and used, and on and on -- high I.Q. seems to have almost no correlation with morality, and hey, toss in the gifted artists of the world and there's no correlation with morality there either -- Hitler was not a bad artist, Nero could play the violin! (ahem.) I still love Maharishi's saying, Getting a PhD is no guarantee -- one could still be insane. Indeed, many mad scientists WERE insane -- Cavendish could not stand the presence of a woman -- though he employed many in his household -- would fire any woman on the spot if he bumped into one mistakenly in his manse. Yet he weighed the Earth itself and discovered Hydrogen. And Fritz Haber, a nobel prize winner, invented a new and wonderful method for Germany to make poison gas and is rightly called the father of chemical warfare. Later, when he fled Nazi Germany and landed in England, the welcoming group of famous scientists refused to shake his hand alone of all the other scientists who escaped Germany in the same boat as Haber. Issac Asimov said, Science has known sin now. And inside this box, right here, is a cat. There's no way to tell if the cat is alive or dead unless you open the box. And whether or not we can ever know the answer without opening the box is a problem that divides physics right down the middle even today. Sigh. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. --- Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 29, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Richard M wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: Which method is most like TMO Research? (HINT: there are only two possible answers.) Let's hope the answer isn't (a): Here are the facts. What conclusions can we draw from them. That'd be naive inductivism, no? Only if it was not falsifiable. I'm not sure I follow you. Perhaps this though: can we agree? It's only a cartoon - but it provides no insight whatsoever into scientific method? (If your retreating from verififability to falsifiabily for your demarcation between good science and bad science, I'm not sure that concept will do the job you require. viz. let in only the good stuff (stuff you like) and exclude the bad stuff (stuff that gets your goat)
[FairfieldLife] Re: *Arctic* hom in the Vedas!
Mullquist wrote: *Arctic* hom[e] in the Vedas! The Vedic 'Aryans' did refer to themselves as Aryans but the Vedas do not state that the Aryans 'conquered' the native peoples of India and destroyed their forts. According to David Frawley, author of Gods, Kings, and Sages, who supports the out of India hypothesis, the Vedic Aryans are autochthonous to India, that is, they were not part of an invasion of people who came from outside India. Frawley thinks that the Vedic Aryans were fighting among themselves, just like the Battle of Kurukshetra. According to Michael Witzel it is a mistake to equate the Vedic 'Aryans' with any particular people. The term Aryan refers to speakers of Indo-European and Indo-Iranian languages, and does not signify a race of people. The Vedic Aryans tribes were composed of varied ethnic people. In the view of Sir Colin Renfrew, the Indo-Aryan language dispersion occurred as a result of trade and agriculture, and not by an migration of masses people out of India or into India. According to Michael Witzel Socio-linguistic theories include the development of Proto-Indo-European as a sort of camp language (another Urdu so to speak), a new Pidgin based on diverse original languages that eventually spread beyond its own rather limited boundaries, for example with the introduction of horse-based pastoralism. Read more: 'Gods, Kings, and Sages' http://www.rwilliams.us/archives/indians.htm Michael Witzel is Wales Professor of Sanskrit at Harvard University. Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Witzel Colin Renfrew is a Fellow of the British Academy. Colin Renfrew: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Renfrew David Frawley is Vamadeva Shastri; Professor of Vedic Astrology and Ayurveda. David Frawley: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Frawley Titles of interest: 'The Home of the Aryans' The search for an Indo-European Homeland By Michael Witzel Harvard University http://tinyurl.com/6nbcp3 'Gods, Kings, and Sages' Vedic Secrets of Ancient Civilization By David Frawley Passage Press, 1991 'Archaeology and Language' The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins by Colin Renfrew Cambridge University Press, 1990
Re: [FairfieldLife] *Arctic* hom in the Vedas!
On Apr 29, 2008, at 11:06 AM, cardemaister wrote: Just got Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak's book from India: http://www.gypsii.com/place.cgi?op=viewid=78901 Unless, of course, if the Vedas are a corruption of the Tamil Veda, which probably came from Kumari Kandam. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard, I'm starting to feel like Ronald Regan over here when I say to you, There you go again. The Earth is bombarded -- and bombarded is exactly the correct term -- by cosmic particles and rays. These things arrive here at speeds that are so high that the new accelerator you're afraid of is a comparatively -- no exaggeration now -- a puny little affair indeed. Trillions upon trillions of stuff-n-bits bombard our atmosphere every second, and most of these collisions are impacts of greater risk than anything that will happen in the new accelerator -- which is doing about one such bombardment event per experiment. The cosmos should have created a new big bang by now, donchatink? There isn't a physicist on the planet who will disagree with the above. Sorry edg but they all would, I think it's you that needs to do a bit more reading on this subject. The stuff that hits earth wouldn't harm us in any way, usually. The odd big one gets through, talk to the dinos about that. It certainly wouldn't cause a big bang. And it wasn't what I was refering to. What I was refering to was the sort of energy created inside particle accelerators that hasn't been seen since the big bang. It really hasn't and we are switching on the biggest this year. There is a 50 billion to one chance that it will destroy the universe and create a new one at the same time. Hawking talked about this partly for amusement and as a thought experiment in a speech the other day. I don't make this stuff up. I think it's an intruiging idea, and while it isn't likely (I wouldn't cancel the pension plan) it is possible. Some people object to scientists taking chances like this who gives em the right! they say. I say do it, it isn't like it would hurt if it all goes pear-shaped. But just reading New Scientist every week is pointless, you have to get your mental hands dirty. So what did you think of my idea about life on planets without a carboniferous period never evolving beyond a primitive culture because of lack of resources, energy etc? That's my own contribution to the debate, and it's good I think. Because without fossil fuels what could we have done? You won't find it on wikipedia yet, but next time I'm hanging with my physicist and cosmologist mates I'll lay it on em. They're all Oxford educated and have kept me up to date on this stuff for twenty odd years now. I know more about evolution than all of them put together so I'm not surprised no one ever came up with it before. I don't know why you think I don't know what I'm talking about here, maybe I'm too flippant in my tossing about of ideas. But I've done a lot of reading on this and it all kind of hangs about in there, so I never bother with links and stuff, I just generalise for ease of consumption, maybe that's it. And I know how science works Edg, it's a process of refinement and experiment, no absolutes. Just the best guess we can make given the current knowledge. That's what I like about it. There is speculation, there is wild speculation and there is cosmology I can't remember who said it, but it's true.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Louis McKenzie wrote: Rev. Wright is not a guy who is just spouting words without the ability to back them up. 'America's chickens are coming home to roost sermon. Numerous white preachers have said the same; falwell blamed 9/11 on american gays, women libbers and secularists (the majority of the country). Hagee whose endorsement McCain sought out blamed Katrina on american gays and others. Most of these guys look forward to the majority of americans being slaughtered in the Apocalypse in the near future. But these white nuts are regular visitors to Bush's White House and other republican haunts and the press doesn't hound the white republican politicians for their connections, in fact they call them values voters. Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Richard, I'm starting to feel like Ronald Regan over here when I say to you, There you go again. The Earth is bombarded -- and bombarded is exactly the correct term -- by cosmic particles and rays. These things arrive here at speeds that are so high that the new accelerator you're afraid of is a comparatively -- no exaggeration now -- a puny little affair indeed. Trillions upon trillions of stuff-n-bits bombard our atmosphere every second, and most of these collisions are impacts of greater risk than anything that will happen in the new accelerator -- which is doing about one such bombardment event per experiment. The cosmos should have created a new big bang by now, donchatink? There isn't a physicist on the planet who will disagree with the above. Sorry edg but they all would, I think it's you that needs to do a bit more reading on this subject. The stuff that hits earth wouldn't harm us in any way, usually. The odd big one gets through, talk to the dinos about that. It certainly wouldn't cause a big bang. And it wasn't what I was refering to. What I was refering to was the sort of energy created inside particle accelerators that hasn't been seen since the big bang. It really hasn't and we are switching on the biggest this year. There is a 50 billion to one chance that it will destroy the universe and create a new one at the same time. Hawking talked about this partly for amusement and as a thought experiment in a speech the other day. I don't make this stuff up. I think it's an intruiging idea, and while it isn't likely (I wouldn't cancel the pension plan) it is possible. Some people object to scientists taking chances like this who gives em the right! they say. I say do it, it isn't like it would hurt if it all goes pear-shaped. But just reading New Scientist every week is pointless, you have to get your mental hands dirty. So what did you think of my idea about life on planets without a carboniferous period never evolving beyond a primitive culture because of lack of resources, energy etc? That's my own contribution to the debate, and it's good I think. Because without fossil fuels what could we have done? You won't find it on wikipedia yet, but next time I'm hanging with my physicist and cosmologist mates I'll lay it on em. They're all Oxford educated and have kept me up to date on this stuff for twenty odd years now. I know more about evolution than all of them put together so I'm not surprised no one ever came up with it before. I don't know why you think I don't know what I'm talking about here, maybe I'm too flippant in my tossing about of ideas. But I've done a lot of reading on this and it all kind of hangs about in there, so I never bother with links and stuff, I just generalise for ease of consumption, maybe that's it. I want to edit the above coz it makes me look like I think I'm an expert in something. What I mean is I get all the practical upshots and understand the concepts because the scientists who do the work are good at explaining things, it's actually difficult not to get the hang of it if you want to spend twenty years with your head in books about space and stuff. And when I say I know more about evolution than all of them put together I'm refering to my physics pals and it's them that tell me this. I'd hate to come over as arrogant, confident I can cope with ;-) And I know how science works Edg, it's a process of refinement and experiment, no absolutes. Just the best guess we can make given the current knowledge. That's what I like about it. There is speculation, there is wild speculation and there is cosmology I can't remember who said it, but it's true.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
On Apr 29, 2008, at 11:25 AM, Richard M wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 29, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Richard M wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote: Which method is most like TMO Research? (HINT: there are only two possible answers.) Let's hope the answer isn't (a): Here are the facts. What conclusions can we draw from them. That'd be naive inductivism, no? Only if it was not falsifiable. I'm not sure I follow you. Perhaps this though: can we agree? It's only a cartoon - but it provides no insight whatsoever into scientific method? (If your retreating from verififability to falsifiabily for your demarcation between good science and bad science, I'm not sure that concept will do the job you require. viz. let in only the good stuff (stuff you like) and exclude the bad stuff (stuff that gets your goat) I was referring to inductivism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
Richard, There you go again. This is getting us nowhere. I used to teach special education, and I'd have the same type of discussions with kids who had a 40 I.Q...they would insist that their spelling of a word was the correct one despite my greater authority telling them differently. It was very VERY endearing in them, but it sucks to see it in you. Go here: this SCIENCE site will educate you as to your errors -- if you read it that is. I'm through with being your mentor. http://tinyurl.com/2e7xrj This article handles ALL the issues that you've been wrong about in your last few threads. Good luck. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Richard, I'm starting to feel like Ronald Regan over here when I say to you, There you go again. The Earth is bombarded -- and bombarded is exactly the correct term -- by cosmic particles and rays. These things arrive here at speeds that are so high that the new accelerator you're afraid of is a comparatively -- no exaggeration now -- a puny little affair indeed. Trillions upon trillions of stuff-n-bits bombard our atmosphere every second, and most of these collisions are impacts of greater risk than anything that will happen in the new accelerator -- which is doing about one such bombardment event per experiment. The cosmos should have created a new big bang by now, donchatink? There isn't a physicist on the planet who will disagree with the above. Sorry edg but they all would, I think it's you that needs to do a bit more reading on this subject. The stuff that hits earth wouldn't harm us in any way, usually. The odd big one gets through, talk to the dinos about that. It certainly wouldn't cause a big bang. And it wasn't what I was refering to. What I was refering to was the sort of energy created inside particle accelerators that hasn't been seen since the big bang. It really hasn't and we are switching on the biggest this year. There is a 50 billion to one chance that it will destroy the universe and create a new one at the same time. Hawking talked about this partly for amusement and as a thought experiment in a speech the other day. I don't make this stuff up. I think it's an intruiging idea, and while it isn't likely (I wouldn't cancel the pension plan) it is possible. Some people object to scientists taking chances like this who gives em the right! they say. I say do it, it isn't like it would hurt if it all goes pear-shaped. But just reading New Scientist every week is pointless, you have to get your mental hands dirty. So what did you think of my idea about life on planets without a carboniferous period never evolving beyond a primitive culture because of lack of resources, energy etc? That's my own contribution to the debate, and it's good I think. Because without fossil fuels what could we have done? You won't find it on wikipedia yet, but next time I'm hanging with my physicist and cosmologist mates I'll lay it on em. They're all Oxford educated and have kept me up to date on this stuff for twenty odd years now. I know more about evolution than all of them put together so I'm not surprised no one ever came up with it before. I don't know why you think I don't know what I'm talking about here, maybe I'm too flippant in my tossing about of ideas. But I've done a lot of reading on this and it all kind of hangs about in there, so I never bother with links and stuff, I just generalise for ease of consumption, maybe that's it. I want to edit the above coz it makes me look like I think I'm an expert in something. What I mean is I get all the practical upshots and understand the concepts because the scientists who do the work are good at explaining things, it's actually difficult not to get the hang of it if you want to spend twenty years with your head in books about space and stuff. And when I say I know more about evolution than all of them put together I'm refering to my physics pals and it's them that tell me this. I'd hate to come over as arrogant, confident I can cope with ;-) And I know how science works Edg, it's a process of refinement and experiment, no absolutes. Just the best guess we can make given the current knowledge. That's what I like about it. There is speculation, there is wild speculation and there is cosmology I can't remember who said it, but it's true.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Scientific Method vs. The Creationist Method
I was referring to inductivism. Forgive my stupidity...but you've lost me! You say Which method is most like TMO Research? and imply that there is a path of virtue characterised by Here are the facts. What conclusions can we draw from them. To me that looks a virtue-less idea (naive inductivism). You say Only if it was not falsifiable. To which I ask: what is Vaj referring to? and you reply I was referring to inductivism. So you mean naive inductivism is a super idea if it is falsifiable? (What would falsify it?!). No doubt I am being thick. Perhaps you could put me out of my misery.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I believe said, Hawking discussed it in connection with the fermi paradox mainly as entertainment, so don't cancel the pension plan. Nobody ever said it was likely but it is possible, as the first paragraph of your article states; But the chance of planetary annihilation by this means is totally miniscule, experimental physicist Greg Landsberg 50,000,000,000 to 1 against was never worth losing sleep over. It's just a bit of fun. Still no opinion on my Only carboniferous period gave humans enough free energy and materials to develop serious technology, and is a possible solution to the Fermi paradox theory? I've been googling for a bit and no one else seems to link the lack of one with Fermi, I'm on to something I reckon. Will keep you posted, maybe I can increase my projected IQ to more than 40 points.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Angela, You've got a very good point. The tenured professors have a stake in any of the studies conducted under their authority. It is understandable that they would suppress any information that would make them look bad in the educational community. Also, it's a matter of keeping their reputation and their jobs. This is one of the reasons why brilliant minds who discover new ideas get persecuted for their works--such as, Galileo. Although the Catholic Church has apologized for its mistake, it didn't do any good to Galileo who's been dead and buried for about 500 years. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. --- Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ __ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Global Warming totalitarianism
Colorado State University officials say handling media inquiries related to Gray's forecasting requires too much time and detracts from efforts to promote other professors' work. Emeritus Professor Gray certainly provokes controversy. You would think though that that is what good science should be all about. The enemies of science are those who seek to close down debate (a favourite ploy of climate change alarmists).
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
...the chickens are coming home to roost boo wrote: Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism. So, you're thinking that Wright's point about biological difference between blacks and whites will be proven? Maybe you should get up to speed and read the transcripts of Wright's speeches! Now that Reverend Wright has expounded on the innate biological differences between whites and blacks, surely some more definitive break is called for. Obama knows that Wright is a thorough-going racist. (...) It turns out, however, that Reverend Wright is indeed a crank and a demagogue. Despite Obama's best efforts, Wright has now supplied the allegedly missing context in which Wright is best understood. Read more: 'A Thomas Eagleton moment?' Posted by Scott Johnson: Powerline, April 29, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/66dgfo
[FairfieldLife] Re: *Arctic* hom in the Vedas!
Just got Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak's book from India: Vaj wrote: Unless, of course, if the Vedas are a corruption of the Tamil Veda, which probably came from Kumari Kandam. :-) As it happens, Vaj, the only evidence which establishes any kind of antiquity for the Aryan gods, even if they originated in the Arctic or in Tamil Nadu, as a matter of certainty and not mere supposition, is epigraphic (ancient inscriptions) evidence, according to Witzel. Unfortunately for Mullquist and yourself, the oldest epigraphs have been found not in India but in Asia Minor. The reference is in a tablet in Hittite cuneiform and written in the Akkadian language, discovered at Boghazkoy, according to Renfrew. Apparently there is a close linguistic affinity between the Mitannians and the Indo-Aryans in respect in cuneiform, which contains the so-called Horse Treatise by a Mitannian named Kikkuli. This was also found at Boghazkoy according to Frawley.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Global Warming totalitarianism
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard M [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Colorado State University officials say handling media inquiries related to Gray's forecasting requires too much time and detracts from efforts to promote other professors' work. Emeritus Professor Gray certainly provokes controversy. You would think though that that is what good science should be all about. The enemies of science are those who seek to close down debate (a favourite ploy of climate change alarmists). Yes. I think anytime anyone says the debate is over on a particular issue is when you know for sure that the debate hasn't even started.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Nor has the Church mended its ways. Religion is many things--and never insignificant among them is its perceived need to control of the masses--education is a major tool for that, so what happens in universities is something they are always very interested in. Tenured profs keep their jobs so they can recycle their lecture notes till they die, but their reputations are always up for grabs. Without that reputation, they can't get the research grants or the lecture circuits. --- John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela, You've got a very good point. The tenured professors have a stake in any of the studies conducted under their authority. It is understandable that they would suppress any information that would make them look bad in the educational community. Also, it's a matter of keeping their reputation and their jobs. This is one of the reasons why brilliant minds who discover new ideas get persecuted for their works--such as, Galileo. Although the Catholic Church has apologized for its mistake, it didn't do any good to Galileo who's been dead and buried for about 500 years. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming, it's no longer a theory. One piece of evidence is only a point. Two points, and you can draw a line. Three points, and you've got a field in which the points multiply exponentially and yield a rich and revealing harvest. --- Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why haven't we heard about this evidence before? Perhaps because the other evidence is so overwhelming? --- Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: See this show (Forbidden Archeology), narrated by Charleton Heston, at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg. Is there a conspiracy to hide the truth? There must be, your link doesn't work. Not to mention the fact that Charleton Heston just died. Very suspicious if you ask me. :-) The real link is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accRaF8HxNg It's silly We know more than you do shuck and jive, with heavy Christian Creationist overtones. I shut it off at the mention of the thoroughly debunked Paluxy footprints. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ __ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Is Hillary a Satanist?
You decide: http://www.rense.com/general81/hilss.htm http://www.psalm9416.com/signsofsatan.htm :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Clinton supporter invited Wright
Duveyoung wrote: And meanwhile we have Rush hoping for riots in Denver. How, exactly can you read the mind of Rush Limbaugh? Maybe if you turned on the radio you could hear what Rush actually said about Denver instead of making things up. If you had done so, you would know that Rush is warning you about recreating 1968. Recreate '68' Join us in the streets of Denver as we resist a two-party system that allows imperialism and racism to continue unrestrained. Read more: http://www.recreate68.org/ The Denver Post has managed the amazing feat of criticizing Rush Limbaugh for supposedly calling for riots at this summer's Democrat convention in Denver while completely downplaying the role of the very organization calling for recreating 68 and all the problems of Chicago '68... Read more: 'Denver Post Downplays Recreate 68 While Criticizing Rush Limbaugh' By P.J. Gladnick NewsBusters, April 26, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/48mykp Then, read about the 'Days of Rage': Heading both north and south on Clark Street, the rampaging mob broke windows and damaged cars along the way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_of_Rage A very scary legacy: ...the Obama campaign and its appendages have set back racial relations a generation. Just ten years ago, any candidate, black or white, would have rejected Wright making a speech about genetic differences in respective black and white brains. Read more: 'The Scary Legacy of the 2008 Democratic Primary' By Victor Davis Hanson NRO, Monday, April 28, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/6oxom4
Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
TurquoiseB wrote: I said it because a number of people were displaying attachment to systems that they personally believe work for everyone. I do not share that belief. But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement really didn't say much except something obvious, like It doesn't rain EVERY day in Seattle. No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that they work as advertised. I suspect that the reason that people believe they work is that 1) as Curtis said, there is a kind of codependent relationship going on, in which the seekers *want* to believe in a system, and thus project onto vague descriptions of predictions or results from a technique what they have been told to expect from them, and 2) the techniques or systems sometimes *do* work to trigger their own latent abilities. The techniques don't *cause* these latent abilities to appear, in my opinion; they just trick the practitioner into the state of attention from which intuition about the future or someone else's past is possible, or from which the particular siddhi or other supposed benefit happens. You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing Apocalypto. She commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done astrology. Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and systems of jyotish, not just one. You will often get errors from the novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on the subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft their skills before hanging out a shingle. A wiser person would have said I haven't studied jyotish so I can't comment on its veracity. Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist Tantra so can't comment on its veracity.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Outlawing Supplements and Herbs
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Big Pharma in Canada wants to outlaw supplements and herbs. Does that mean salt and pepper? Those have medicinal qualities too. Idiots. http://www.naturalnews.com/023121.html I agree completely with you, Bhairitu. This news item highlights the utter lack of the free market when it comes to health care in both the U.S. and Canada. The A.M.A. is a government-sanctioned monopoly that controls supply of doctors in the U.S. Wonder why health care costs are so high? Well, that's what you get when a monopoly controls things. A free market in health care would enable more people to study medicine, alternative medicines to have equal opportunity in the market place as well as government funding and sanction, and less restrictions on how health care is meted out (requiring so much red tape and controls that a one-day visit to a hospital could cost $5,000-$10,000!). Let the free market reign! Actually it's not about the free market. It is about laissez faire capitalism and big business pharmaceutical companies wanting the whole pie and trying to get rid of the small guys who sell herbs and supplements. People in the supplement and herb industry will tell you they would like some regulations on supplements and particularly herbs so that they can be guaranteed that what they purchased to put in their products are what they say they are. The pharmaceutical companies want the regulations so stringent that only they can make the products because only they can afford the gear and testing the cost of which will all get passed along to the consumer probably in the form of an inferior product. This issue has been going on for years and I expect the scumbags will again try to get such a ridiculous law passed here. Except in this case there are actually even Republicans who oppose such a law so attempts have failed. Under the proposed Canadian law you couldn't even grow ginger or fennel (which grows wild anyway) in your back yard.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Global Warming totalitarianism
Colorado State University officials say handling media inquiries related to Gray's forecasting requires too much time and detracts from efforts to promote other professors' work. Richard M wrote: The enemies of science are those who seek to close down debate (a favourite ploy of climate change alarmists). The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/173925
[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
-Right - I've found astrology to be very useful. I've been consulting my charts for 30 years and know what to expect. For example, today my transits are: 1. Jupiter opp Sun 2. Juper trine Asc. 3. Uranus Sq. Midheaven 4. Uranus trine Sun 5. Venus trine Jupiter 6. Mercury Trine Asc. For those unknowledgeable in the subject (even though I've been at it for decades, I'm still a novice)...we can imagine a clock with THREE types of hands: 1. very slow moving (outer planets). 2. Moderately slow moving (Saturn and Jupiter). and 3. Inner planets. We can add a 4-th influence : extremely fast moving clock hand: The Moon. But this is so fast that I disregard it. In a nutshell, the one to watch out for is MARS. But the real powerhouse and karmic storage planet is SATURN. Don't ever mess around with Saturn! At any rate, concerning the above 6 transits, two are outer, two are middle, and two are inner (Venus and Mercury). On a daily basis for predicting the general trend of activities, by experience I know that today will be basically a slam dunk - green lights all the way. But I take nothing for granted since there still is the Uranus square Midheaven. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TurquoiseB wrote: I said it because a number of people were displaying attachment to systems that they personally believe work for everyone. I do not share that belief. But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement really didn't say much except something obvious, like It doesn't rain EVERY day in Seattle. No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that they work as advertised. I suspect that the reason that people believe they work is that 1) as Curtis said, there is a kind of codependent relationship going on, in which the seekers *want* to believe in a system, and thus project onto vague descriptions of predictions or results from a technique what they have been told to expect from them, and 2) the techniques or systems sometimes *do* work to trigger their own latent abilities. The techniques don't *cause* these latent abilities to appear, in my opinion; they just trick the practitioner into the state of attention from which intuition about the future or someone else's past is possible, or from which the particular siddhi or other supposed benefit happens. You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing Apocalypto. She commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done astrology. Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and systems of jyotish, not just one. You will often get errors from the novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on the subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft their skills before hanging out a shingle. A wiser person would have said I haven't studied jyotish so I can't comment on its veracity. Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist Tantra so can't comment on its veracity.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
Okay, we're done. You're not reading, you're not learning, and you're wasting both our times. Have fun believing you stuff. Given your recent threads, I'll take a wild guess and say that you don't have any friends who know any better than you, or if they do, they've gotten to know how you think and have given up, as I do, now, officially, trying to correct your views. Geeze at this rate, I'm saving myself a lot of angst by letting you, Shemp, the War Monger, Off etc. just spew and spew the goofiest stuff. Richard, you could have at least read the whole articles at wiki that I referred you to instead of just the first sentence. You're hooking onto a fact here, a fact there, but ignoring most of the subtleties and then concluding about reality based on only a couple facts. And you have totally not countered many of my explanations. Hmmm, what other researchers do that sort of science? Sigh. If I could get about ten of the folks here to start posting at another Yahoo group that bans trolls and dunderheads, I'd never read another post here. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: As I believe said, Hawking discussed it in connection with the fermi paradox mainly as entertainment, so don't cancel the pension plan. Nobody ever said it was likely but it is possible, as the first paragraph of your article states; But the chance of planetary annihilation by this means is totally miniscule, experimental physicist Greg Landsberg 50,000,000,000 to 1 against was never worth losing sleep over. It's just a bit of fun. Still no opinion on my Only carboniferous period gave humans enough free energy and materials to develop serious technology, and is a possible solution to the Fermi paradox theory? I've been googling for a bit and no one else seems to link the lack of one with Fermi, I'm on to something I reckon. Will keep you posted, maybe I can increase my projected IQ to more than 40 points.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Atlantis Is Buried Underneath the Snow of Antartica
Actually, Laws of Form does not require all that much. The simplicity is so profound that this is what gives folks problems, not any kind of complexity. But any reasonably intelligent fourteen-year old should be able to do it. Being a mathematical moron, I had the advantage of innocence. And then, I was predisposed. When my first arithmetic teacher told me, One and one is two, I said, No way. One and one is one. When he asked for an explanation, I said, It doesn't matter how many times Grandma hollers 'Angela' out the window, only one Angela will show up for dinner. Well, that is the law of calling and it's deeper and more simple than the laws of arithmetic. The law of calling is Axiom One in the Laws of Form: The value of a call made again is the value of the call (1994, p. 1). I learned more about Language from Laws of Form than any linguist except Panini. --- Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Angela, I think Laws of Form and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions are about all one needs to see how challenging it is to be a knower of reality. First of all, no one with less than, say, 140 I.Q. can even understand the math of Laws let alone apply those truths to the soft disciplines, and secondly, no one can overcome the problem of waiting for old farts to die without having extraordinary charisma or other rare thingie going for them. Hawking's disability may have actually helped him have more street cred since he obviously was virtually possessed with a desire for truth and, well, he not only didn't have anything better to do, it was the ONLY thing he could do. (...ignoring his divorces, his love/hate relationships with his helpers, etc. but of course.) Einstein et al were brains as rare as lottery wins, and even so, they took decades to get their ideas out there and being taught to the masses. If Einstein and Bohr were alive today, they'd still be hacking at each other's theories by rolling Hawkings' wheelchair viciously back and forth in a game of pong between them. And then, of course, no matter the size of the intellect, nukes get invented and used, death rays get invented and used, and on and on -- high I.Q. seems to have almost no correlation with morality, and hey, toss in the gifted artists of the world and there's no correlation with morality there either -- Hitler was not a bad artist, Nero could play the violin! (ahem.) I still love Maharishi's saying, Getting a PhD is no guarantee -- one could still be insane. Indeed, many mad scientists WERE insane -- Cavendish could not stand the presence of a woman -- though he employed many in his household -- would fire any woman on the spot if he bumped into one mistakenly in his manse. Yet he weighed the Earth itself and discovered Hydrogen. And Fritz Haber, a nobel prize winner, invented a new and wonderful method for Germany to make poison gas and is rightly called the father of chemical warfare. Later, when he fled Nazi Germany and landed in England, the welcoming group of famous scientists refused to shake his hand alone of all the other scientists who escaped Germany in the same boat as Haber. Issac Asimov said, Science has known sin now. And inside this box, right here, is a cat. There's no way to tell if the cat is alive or dead unless you open the box. And whether or not we can ever know the answer without opening the box is a problem that divides physics right down the middle even today. Sigh. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having spent my entire adult life in universities, the fact that there is no academic freedom is more than obvious to me. I've said this many times before on this list. It is true in the humanities and it is true in the sciences. Everyone has heard of Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), and the process is exactly the one discussed in the first video: evidence contrary to the current paradigm is ignored. And when it gets overwhelming, it gets suppressed because careers depend on the current paradigm. Think about it: you'd have to re-educate your comfortable old self, your publications and your lecture notes would be obsolete, and you would be a sorry-ass has-been. So the whole book about how scientific revolutions occur can be summed up as follows: old farts die. The video says that the conspiracy to cover up evidence to the contrary of the current paradigm isn't deliberate--well, I don't know enough about what goes on in the sciences (other than linguistics) to have much more than a suspicion, but in the humanities (including and especially in linguistics), I am sure it is deliberate--in that area I've done my homework. Contrary to Judy's opinion, however, I am not a conspiracy theorist. When the evidence is overwhelming,
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...the chickens are coming home to roost boo wrote: Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism. So, you're thinking that Wright's point about biological difference between blacks and whites will be proven? Maybe you should get up to speed and read the transcripts of Wright's speeches! you never performed too well on those reading comprehension tests did you willytex?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, we're done. Yes, I think we're done too. You didn't really get what I was talking about, or even begin to accept that I might actually know about this stuff and was simply relaying a thought experiment by one of the worlds foremost physicists. It could have been interesting, but never mind. Have fun on the new forum, if you can persuade anyone to leave with you. You're not reading, you're not learning, and you're wasting both our times. Have fun believing you stuff. Given your recent threads, I'll take a wild guess and say that you don't have any friends who know any better than you, or if they do, they've gotten to know how you think and have given up, as I do, now, officially, trying to correct your views. Geeze at this rate, I'm saving myself a lot of angst by letting you, Shemp, the War Monger, Off etc. just spew and spew the goofiest stuff. Richard, you could have at least read the whole articles at wiki that I referred you to instead of just the first sentence. You're hooking onto a fact here, a fact there, but ignoring most of the subtleties and then concluding about reality based on only a couple facts. And you have totally not countered many of my explanations. Hmmm, what other researchers do that sort of science? Sigh. If I could get about ten of the folks here to start posting at another Yahoo group that bans trolls and dunderheads, I'd never read another post here. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo richardhughes103@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: As I believe said, Hawking discussed it in connection with the fermi paradox mainly as entertainment, so don't cancel the pension plan. Nobody ever said it was likely but it is possible, as the first paragraph of your article states; But the chance of planetary annihilation by this means is totally miniscule, experimental physicist Greg Landsberg 50,000,000,000 to 1 against was never worth losing sleep over. It's just a bit of fun. Still no opinion on my Only carboniferous period gave humans enough free energy and materials to develop serious technology, and is a possible solution to the Fermi paradox theory? I've been googling for a bit and no one else seems to link the lack of one with Fermi, I'm on to something I reckon. Will keep you posted, maybe I can increase my projected IQ to more than 40 points.
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism. So, you're thinking that Wright's point about biological difference between blacks and whites will be proven? Maybe you should get up to speed and read the transcripts of Wright's speeches! boo wrote: you never performed too well on those reading comprehension tests did Speaking of reading comprehension, the problem is, according to Brit Hume of Fox News, Ambassador Peck never said America's chickens are coming home to roost. So, I guess the Rev. Wright has a real problem with his reading AND hearing comprehension! Nor did he suggest America engages in terrorism. Peck did make some foreign policy references in speaking about bombing Haiti, Cambodia and Panama but said nothing about Hiroshima or Nagasaki as Reverend Wright also claimed. Source: 'Fact-Checking Reverend Jeremiah Wright' By Brit Hume Fox News, Monday, April 28, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/4xmx7f
Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the
On Apr 29, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Bhairitu wrote: You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing Apocalypto. She commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done astrology. Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and systems of jyotish, not just one. You will often get errors from the novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on the subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft their skills before hanging out a shingle. A wiser person would have said I haven't studied jyotish so I can't comment on its veracity. Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist Tantra so can't comment on its veracity. Interestingly, Jyotish figures prominently in several Buddhist anuttara tantras, like the Great Cycle of Time tantra (kalachakra- tantra). Buddhahood is likened to the mastery of various cycles of time, inner, outer and secret. You see the same thing in Hindu agamas like the Shiva-swarodaya. When yogis of these systems are really finely attuned to kosmos, they can even tell the rising sign of a person by feeling their normal breathing patterns. Swami Rama had this siddhi. But ultimately, they go beyond time--and can see the cycles in everything from the breath to the changing landscape. It's pretty hard to be a Buddha and not be omniscient, and mastering time is a central point of unimpeded omniscience.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Read more: 'Wikipedia's zealots' By Lawrence Solomon Financial Post, Saturday, April 12, 2008 http://tinyurl.com/4f7jxj [snip] The above article is so important, Willytex, that it deserves to be reproduced in full here: Wikipedia's zealots The thought police at the supposedly independent site are fervently enforcing the climate orthodoxy Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Saturday, April 12, 2008 Related Topics Climatology Earth Science Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Benny Peiser Kim Dabelstein Petersen Story Tools -+ Change font size Print this story E-Mail this story Share This Story Facebook Digg Del.icio.us More Story tools presented by As I'm writing this column for the Financial Post, I am simultaneously editing a page on Wikipedia. I am confident that just about everything I write for my column will be available for you to read. I am equally confident that you will be able to read just about nothing that I write for the page on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia page is entitled Naomi Oreskes, after a professor of history and science studies at the University of California San Diego, but the page offers only sketchy details about Oreskes. The page is mostly devoted to a notorious 2004 paper that she wrote, and that Science journal published, called Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change. This paper analyzed articles in peer-reviewed journals to see if any disagreed with the alarming positions on global warming taken by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position, Oreskes concluded. Oreskes's paper -- which claimed to comprehensively examine all articles in a scientific database with the keywords climate change - - is nonsense. As FP readers know, for the last 18 months I have been profiling scientists who disagree with the UN panel's position. My Deniers series, which now runs to some 40 columns, describes many of the world's most prominent scientists. They include authors or reviewers for the UN panel (before they quit in disgust). They even include the scientist known as the father of scientific climatology, who is recognized as being the most cited climatologist in the world. Yet somehow Oreskes missed every last one of these exceptions to the presumed consensus, and somehow so did the peer reviewers that Science chose to evaluate Oreskes's work. When Oreskes's paper came out, it was immediately challenged by science writers and scientists alike, one of them being Benny Peiser, a prominent U.K. scientist and publisher of CCNet, an electronic newsletter to which I and thousands of others subscribe. CCNet daily circulates articles disputing the conventional wisdom on climate change. No publication better informs readers about climate-change controversies, and no person is better placed to judge informed dissent on climate change than Benny Peiser. For this reason, when visiting Oreskes's page on Wikipedia several weeks ago, I was surprised to read not only that Oreskes had been vindicated but that Peiser had been discredited. More than that, the page portrayed Peiser himself as having grudgingly conceded Oreskes's correctness. Upon checking with Peiser, I found he had done no such thing. The Wikipedia page had misunderstood or distorted his comments. I then exercised the right to edit Wikipedia that we all have, corrected the Wikipedia entry, and advised Peiser that I had done so. Peiser wrote back saying he couldn't see my corrections on the Wikipedia page. Had I neglected to save them after editing them, I wondered. I made the changes again, and this time confirmed that the changes had been saved. But then, in a twinkle, they were gone again! I made other changes. And others. They all disappeared shortly after they were made. The thought police at the supposedly independent site are fervently enforcing the climate orthodoxy Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post Published: Saturday, April 12, 2008 Related Topics Climatology Earth Science Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Benny Peiser Kim Dabelstein Petersen Story Tools -+ Change font size Print this story E-Mail this story Share This Story Facebook Digg Del.icio.us More Story tools presented by Nonplused, I investigated. Wikipedia logs all changes. I found mine. And then I found Tabletop's. Someone called Tabletop was undoing my edits, and, following what I suppose is Wikietiquette, also explained why. Note that Peiser has retracted this critique and admits that he was wrong! Tabletop said. I undid Tabletop's undoing of my edits, thinking I had an unassailable response: Tabletop's changes claim to represent Peiser's views. I have checked with Peiser and he disputes Tabletop's version. Tabletop undid my undid,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
On Apr 29, 2008, at 5:44 PM, shempmcgurk wrote: My Deniers series, which now runs to some 40 columns, describes many of the world's most prominent scientists. Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. How many studies were part of the massive campaign by oil companies to seed dissent and doubt with often very questionable science? What about the former oil company lobbyist Bush used for science review (who would edit out anything remotely hinting at climate change being real)? Where do you get this crap Shemp, the Rush Limbaugh Show? Your climate change advice sounds like it comes from a right-wing drug addict (to put it nicely)!
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
On Apr 29, 2008, at 11:12 AM, boo_lives wrote: Numerous white preachers have said the same; falwell blamed 9/11 on american gays, women libbers and secularists (the majority of the country). Hagee whose endorsement McCain sought out blamed Katrina on american gays and others. Most of these guys look forward to the majority of americans being slaughtered in the Apocalypse in the near future. But these white nuts are regular visitors to Bush's White House and other republican haunts and the press doesn't hound the white republican politicians for their connections, in fact they call them values voters. Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism. No kidding--excellent observation, boo. It must be me--I looked at the 3 videos of Wright answering questions on Monday, the ones that are all over the news now, and I didn't see anything of what some others apparently did. Am I that jaded? One guy posted the videos with the heading 'Shocking' while another said 'Smug.' I didn't see much of that, definitely not the first at least. What I saw was someone with a lot of self-confidence who didn't feel like putting up with the media crap, but who answered every single one of the questions, didn't dodge, and was extremely articulate. That's a hell of a lot more than you can say for George Bush. And what about Falwell's comments? Why was he still received at the WH after those? No, there's no double standard in America...it's just everyone's imagination. I recommend anyone with any interest to see the qa on YouTube and make up your own minds. (My personally most favorite moment, How long did Cheney serve? when the topic of patriotism came up. The Rev is a decorated Marine. And who does the idiotic media sheeple trumpet as more patriotic? The slob who had other priorities. Only in America. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 29, 2008, at 5:44 PM, shempmcgurk wrote: My Deniers series, which now runs to some 40 columns, describes many of the world's most prominent scientists. Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. I think part of the reason for that is that climate change alarmists claim disaster in so many varied parts of life and science. For example, alarmists claim that global warming will affect mosquitoes in the arctic. So non-climate or non-meteorology scientists in those fields feel they have to respond. But it's an interesting question, Vaj, because if JUST climate or meteorology scientists were asked about global warming, I'd be surprised if more than a handful were alarmists. Oh, by the way, are either Al Gore or Leonardo DiCaprio meteorologists? Is Jeffrey Sacks? How many studies were part of the massive campaign by oil companies to seed dissent and doubt with often very questionable science? None as far as I know. But if you know different, why don't you name them? And how many carbon credit companies does Al Gore have stock in? And do you find that to be a conflict of interest? What about the former oil company lobbyist Bush used for science review (who would edit out anything remotely hinting at climate change being real)? George Bush has become one of you guys, so I guess he's someone you should be happy with. Where do you get this crap Shemp, the Rush Limbaugh Show? Your climate change advice sounds like it comes from a right-wing drug addict (to put it nicely)! If it is crap, why are you wasting time with me?
[FairfieldLife] Re: the chickens are coming home to roost
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams willytex@ wrote: Louis McKenzie wrote: Rev. Wright is not a guy who is just spouting words without the ability to back them up. 'America's chickens are coming home to roost sermon. Numerous white preachers have said the same; falwell blamed 9/11 on american gays, women libbers and secularists (the majority of the country). ...and now you know why many on the so-called right have been calling Falwell a schmuck for years. Ask David Horowitz what he thinks of Falwell (and not just recently but years ago). Hagee whose endorsement McCain sought out blamed Katrina on american gays and others. Most of these guys look forward to the majority of americans being slaughtered in the Apocalypse in the near future. But these white nuts are regular visitors to Bush's White House and other republican haunts and the press doesn't hound the white republican politicians for their connections, in fact they call them values voters. Personally I don't care for Wright but the way the wright-obama situation is being treated by the press actually is proving his point about racism.
[FairfieldLife] Re: good interview with Rev. Wright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He has given two speeches since the interview one to the national press core and the other to the NAACP can anyone tell me where I can access these speeches... Yes! You can find them all here at: www.google.com. Here's how it works, Louis: just put the name of the person and where he spoke and the word transcript into the search box. Several responses will come up but, gee, you then actually have to do some homework ON YOUR OWN to come up with the actual speeches. When you've found them, please share the links with the rest of us. Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's an interview with the Rev Wright that also gives you the context of that Damn America sound bite. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on?
[FairfieldLife] Re: good interview with Rev. Wright
(snip) The difference between the message of Reverand Wright and Barack Obama is this: Reverend Wright is a bitter baby-boomer... He comes from the same mold as John McCain and Hillary and Billy Bob Clinton... Barack Obama is attempting to 'break this mold'... He is attempting to 'Unify'... This is the basis of his 'Spiritual Message'... This is also the legacy of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi- 'Unity is the Way' R.G.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Deniers
Notice the phrase the world's most prominent scientists rather than the world's most prominent climate or meteorology scientists. This seems to be an appeal to priesthood pedigree rather than scientific rationality? But if that's your guiding light, what ad hominem will you deploy to denigrate climate sceptics such as Richard Lindzen, atmospheric physicist and the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology? Or John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville? (continues ad nauseam...)
[FairfieldLife] 'Hillary Makes 'Rocky a Pansy'
One Hillary endorsement today by the Governor of North Carolina said: Hillary is a fighter, and makes Rocky look like a pansy... Sounds like we've moved on from Philadelphia?
[FairfieldLife] Funny Math, Part I, The Obama-Clinton Story (article)
Funny Math, Part I, The Obama-Clinton Story http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/33110 By David Swanson Obama has 1,491 pledged delegates. Clinton has 1,332 pledged delegates. There remain 408 delegates to be pledged, plus 19 that have been pledged to Edwards. Clinton would need to win by a gap of 39 percent to catch up to Obama - not the huge win of 9 percent that she had in Pennsylvania. These numbers are based on leaving out Florida and Michigan, which are being left out. These numbers do not include Super Delegates. But these are the indisputable numbers of delegates assigned to candidates by actual voters and caucus-goers. Clinton cannot win. Period. She can only hope for an anti-democratic coup by Super Delegates that would destroy the Democratic Party. So, why did we see Clinton Wins headlines all over the nation following her pick-up of 20 delegates in Pennsylvania? When has any other candidate been kept on life-support by media corporations in this way? Hasn't the standard for dropping out always been - for every other candidate - the impossibility of winning, not actually having lost? What can Clinton hope to gain from staying in other than hurting Obama's chances in order to avoid his running as an incumbent in 4 years? And why is it so difficult for people to think for themselves and let the media and the Super Delegates and the Democratic Party know that WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH? Don't believe me? Don't know how to do addition? Don't own a calculator? Here's a video of Chris Matthews admitting the media's role in this farce: http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/32937 Here's how you can contact the DNC: 877-336-7200 or http://www.democrats.org/contact.html
[FairfieldLife] Re:Free eBook + other free downloads on Advaita
Hi Rick, Funny you posted John Sherman's book. I've been reading it the past couple of days and really enjoying it. I've also watched a bunch of his YouTube videos over the past week. I hadn't heard of him until recently. He was in Santa Monica on Sunday. I had hoped to attend his satsang, but my client's event the evening before went far too late into the night. Let me know what you think of the book. Best, Gary
[FairfieldLife] Re:Free eBook + other free downloads on Advaita
---from spirithappenings blog: Another person of interest is John Sherman, who spent 18 years in a federal prison for political bombings. John became interested in Buddhism when there was a presentation by Buddhists at his prison. When Gangaji went to his prison, he became interested in her teachings. He refers to himself as at one time as Gangaji's pet. I believe he has broken off with her. Sherman was supposed to become a teacher but resisted for years. When he realized that he was 61 years old and a convicted felon, Sherman said he had no job opportunities other than to be a teacher. Sherman has a very soothing voice. He has a one theme message Ramana's self-inquiry. He has lots of Podcast MP3 downloads, each one of which is over an hour long. His web site is http://www.riverganga.org/. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Gary Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick, Funny you posted John Sherman's book. I've been reading it the past couple of days and really enjoying it. I've also watched a bunch of his YouTube videos over the past week. I hadn't heard of him until recently. He was in Santa Monica on Sunday. I had hoped to attend his satsang, but my client's event the evening before went far too late into the night. Let me know what you think of the book. Best, Gary
[FairfieldLife] Neo-Advaitin Sherman transcript
at http://www.tinyurl.com/4vzfnl
[FairfieldLife] More on Wright's Speech...Guess who it was set-up by?
« Barack Obama cuts bait with Jeremiah Wright | Main | "Pansy" reference in Hillary Clinton endorsement raises some hackles »Was Jeremiah Wright's speech set up by a Clinton supporter?Well, here's a most interesting connection we just came across.Everybody is talking today about how much the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's latest unrepentant militant remarks hurt his most prominent parishoner, Sen. Barack Obama, and his chances to win the Democratic presidential nomination and the general election. So much so that the Obama camp realized the latent danger overnight and the candidate was forced to speak out publicly a second time today, as The Ticket noted here earlier today.There was little doubt left in today's remarks by Obama, who recently said he could no more disown Wright than he could the black community. He pretty much disowned Wright today. Obama described himself as "outraged" and "saddened" by "the spectacle of what we saw yesterday."But now, it turns out, we should have been paying a little less attention to Wright's speech and the histrionics of his ensuing news conference and taken a peek atwho was sitting next to him at the head table for the National Press Club event.It was the Rev. Dr. Barbara Reynolds, a former editorial board member of USA Today who teaches at the Howard University School of Divinity. An ordained minister, as New York Daily News writer Errol Louis points out in today's column, she was introduced at the press club event as the person "who organized" it.But guess what? She's also an ardent longtime booster of Obama's sole remaining competitor for the Democratic nomination, none other than Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. It won't take very much at all for Obama supporters to see in Wright's carefully arranged Washington event that was so damaging to Obama the strategic, nefarious manipulation of the Clintons.Read the article by clicking on the above link.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Clinton supporter invited Wright
The only way that could happen is if Obama get side tracked Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It might, indeed, be worth it if Wright ruins Obama's chances. I'm praying that Obama is wearing a mask to keep his head above this fray, but truth be told, he's put black angst on the backburner -- for the eventual greater good of blacks, we hope, but we know history too, and Obama's heart may not matter once he actually gets into office and then finds out how the gears in the smoked filled back room grind to a halt if not oiled heavily with pork grease. Whoopi Goldberg said on The View a few days ago that maybe we should vote for McCain since it was his party that got us into the Iraq mess, and so, that party should take the blame as the war continues until finally it has to answer to the American public for it and has to enact laws that will penalize those corporations that profited from war so that they can be taxed enough to pay the three trillion dollar debt of the war. Like that. Makes sense -- ugly ugly sense. I hate the concept, but.h. And hey, better that Wright is getting all the air-time instead of Sharpton who is making war cries of shut down the city. And meanwhile we have Rush hoping for riots in Denver. GAWD, eh? Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, amarnath wrote: I like Rev Wright and believe he is speaking the truth in the tradition of Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim, Eckhart Tolle, and, of course, Jesus, Budha, as well as many other teachers of the One Universal Truth of Love Peace and egolessness. I believe America and the world needs a lot more courageous people like Rev Wright. In my view these are the Real Patriots through whom we hear actually the voice of God. I feel very sad that not more people have the courage to speak the Real Truth of God's Love Peace and egolessness. Perhaps, Rev Wright can step up and follow in the footsteps of Jesus, Gandhi, ML King, Peace Pilgrim and other preachers of Truth. Not that Rev Wright has not done enough good already compared to the rest of us. Perhaps, this is more important then Obama becoming President. Perhaps, it would be a better contrast to have Hillary or McCain as President doing the same old politics and Rev Wright speaking to the Universal Truths of of God's Love Peace and egolessness. thanks for listening, anatol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert wrote: Clinton supporter invited Wright Obama's campaign has disavowed Wright's media tour, and a correspondent notes an interesting detail: Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton. .. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
Wright has diarrea of the vocal cords and a BIG EGO and he LOVES the attention, that is why he is eating his 5 minutes of fame up
[FairfieldLife] Jai Bob
It could easily be Marley. But that rendezvous was last weekend. Tonight its Dylan. I am a bit behind the curve. No wonder to close readers of FFL. But Dylan is such a cliche, no doubt. But those who dismiss him as passe are missing something grand. I am listening to Modern Times. Released Aug 2006. Prolly heard some of it earlier. But tonight I am quite listening. Bob in the groove. Bob in the corner pocket. Bob keeps pushing the boundary and borderline. And this is after listening to a lot, but hardly all, of earlier righteous works. Those were quite fine. But Bob continues to morph, grow, evolve and hit it. (Damn Rhapsody, only 4-5 songs off the CD. Well, maybe yahoo music is in my future. If they don't short change Artists.) Modern Times became the singer-songwriter's first #1 album in the U.S. since 1976's Desire. At age 65, Dylan became the oldest living person ever to have an album enter the Billboard charts at number one. I never knew. But its sweet that Bob still has the juice. Transformed. Not the earlier Bob, which I still love. But he keeps growing. Like life.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Jai Bob
On Apr 29, 2008, at 9:29 PM, new.morning wrote: It could easily be Marley. But that rendezvous was last weekend. Tonight its Dylan. I am a bit behind the curve. No wonder to close readers of FFL. But Dylan is such a cliche, no doubt. But those who dismiss him as passe are missing something grand. I am listening to Modern Times. Released Aug 2006. Prolly heard some of it earlier. But tonight I am quite listening. Bob in the groove. Bob in the corner pocket. Bob keeps pushing the boundary and borderline. And this is after listening to a lot, but hardly all, of earlier righteous works. Those were quite fine. But Bob continues to morph, grow, evolve and hit it. (Damn Rhapsody, only 4-5 songs off the CD. Well, maybe yahoo music is in my future. If they don't short change Artists.) Modern Times became the singer-songwriter's first #1 album in the U.S. since 1976's Desire. At age 65, Dylan became the oldest living person ever to have an album enter the Billboard charts at number one. I never knew. But its sweet that Bob still has the juice. Transformed. Not the earlier Bob, which I still love. But he keeps growing. Like life. I think Modern Times is one of his best, and that's saying something. Just got it myself a few months ago and can't stop listening to it. Amazing stuff. Pretty cool that he's still got the stuff. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
I have Obama's jyotish chart. His pastor or guru is represented by a malefic Mercury. Mercury is the lord of the 64th navamsha. As such, it very likely that this pastor will seriously damage Obama's chances of getting the Democratic nomination. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What to do, Louis? We could nominate Rev Wright? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
Louis, I do not like the tone of the subject heading at all. Seems awfully petty to me, seems like some folks are trying to make you look bad for having admired the wrong man. A phrase like, Whose side are you on? is particularly stupid. This is not a matter of taking sides. So please just ignore those comments. Consider their source. a --- Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Re: [FairfieldLife] Is Hillary a Satanist?
No, just old enough to remember the Agnew years: http://www.quixoticals.com/2007/04/spiro-agnew-caricature-watch.html --- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You decide: http://www.rense.com/general81/hilss.htm http://www.psalm9416.com/signsofsatan.htm :-) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
[FairfieldLife] Re: Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
Frankly, I like that Obama has a Rev Wright. I wish the crudeness of current American politics did not force him to disown the good Rev. Straight talking, perhaps emphatic, even hypebole-driven connections can be balancing, invigorating and insightful. I hope Barack keeps Wright as part of a transparent brain-trust and kitchen cabinet. Politics today is so afraid of speaking something resembling the truth. Its largely pandering. Few want to be told that we have responsibilities, we have blames, we have burdens. America is not the great shining knight of righteousness that it could have been. It has goodness. And a lot of baggage, corruption, weak thinking and calloused hearts. I think Lincoln and Jefferson would weep at viewing today's America. Wright is a force, not alone, but one of many, together that can help steer us back to the highest form of the American Spirit. I hope Barack keeps the door open to Wright. If he doesn't, he is less different than Hill than I would like to believe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Louis, I do not like the tone of the subject heading at all. Seems awfully petty to me, seems like some folks are trying to make you look bad for having admired the wrong man. A phrase like, Whose side are you on? is particularly stupid. This is not a matter of taking sides. So please just ignore those comments. Consider their source. a --- Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Among Galactic Civilizations, Earth Is Class Zero
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hugheshugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_esq@ wrote: To All: I was watching a film clip on UTube last night which featured a Physics Professor Kaku from New York City University. He stated that, at the present time, there appears to be no evidence of any civilizations in the galaxy that have achieved mastery over nature. Physicists are using a classification system with the following achievement value: Class 1- a civilization that has achieved mastery in using the available resources in its own planet. Class 2 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the Sun, after exhausting the energy resources in its own planet. Class 3 - a civilization that has harnessed the power of the galaxy, after exhausting its reliance on the Sun. Using this criteria, the professor believed that the Earth is Class Zero since the civilization of Earth is still relying on fossil fuels for its enery resource. In science fiction speak, Class 2 civilizations would be equivalent to the Star Trek spacefarers. Class 3 civilizations would be equivalent to the Empire in Star Wars. What is 'civilization'? Is it better to have a billion ignorant people go into outer space, living in extra-terrestrial shopping malls, scratching around on the barren rocks they discover, and to boldly go where no ignaramous has gone before? Or is it better to have a few billion enlightened people living in tune with nature on Earth, nurturing the heart and soul of the inner spirit of life, and expanding the mind to its full self- sufficient invincible capacity? I'd be happy with either scenario, but it looks like we're gonna have to make do with a few billion bozos stuck on earth scratching around on the barren rocks we're creating here. I have an escape pod. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Jai Bob
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It could easily be Marley. But that rendezvous was last weekend. Tonight its Dylan. I am a bit behind the curve. No wonder to close readers of FFL. But Dylan is such a cliche, no doubt. But those who dismiss him as passe are missing something grand. I am listening to Modern Times. Released Aug 2006. Prolly heard some of it earlier. But tonight I am quite listening. Bob in the groove. Bob in the corner pocket. Bob keeps pushing the boundary and borderline. And this is after listening to a lot, but hardly all, of earlier righteous works. Those were quite fine. But Bob continues to morph, grow, evolve and hit it. (Damn Rhapsody, only 4-5 songs off the CD. Well, maybe yahoo music is in my future. If they don't short change Artists.) Modern Times became the singer-songwriter's first #1 album in the U.S. since 1976's Desire. At age 65, Dylan became the oldest living person ever to have an album enter the Billboard charts at number one. I never knew. But its sweet that Bob still has the juice. Transformed. Not the earlier Bob, which I still love. But he keeps growing. Like life. The billboard charts in US, and the billboard charts in UK, are 2 entirely different animals. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Jai Bob
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 29, 2008, at 9:29 PM, new.morning wrote: It could easily be Marley. But that rendezvous was last weekend. Tonight its Dylan. I am a bit behind the curve. No wonder to close readers of FFL. But Dylan is such a cliche, no doubt. But those who dismiss him as passe are missing something grand. I am listening to Modern Times. Released Aug 2006. Prolly heard some of it earlier. But tonight I am quite listening. Bob in the groove. Bob in the corner pocket. Bob keeps pushing the boundary and borderline. And this is after listening to a lot, but hardly all, of earlier righteous works. Those were quite fine. But Bob continues to morph, grow, evolve and hit it. (Damn Rhapsody, only 4-5 songs off the CD. Well, maybe yahoo music is in my future. If they don't short change Artists.) Modern Times became the singer-songwriter's first #1 album in the U.S. since 1976's Desire. At age 65, Dylan became the oldest living person ever to have an album enter the Billboard charts at number one. I never knew. But its sweet that Bob still has the juice. Transformed. Not the earlier Bob, which I still love. But he keeps growing. Like life. I think Modern Times is one of his best, and that's saying something. Just got it myself a few months ago and can't stop listening to it. Amazing stuff. Pretty cool that he's still got the stuff. Sal I used to like Dylan, still admire the stuff he used to do. Can't stand Modern Times, very weak, very monotonous. Must be a baby-boomer vs gen-x thing. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: *Arctic* hom in the Vedas!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just got Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak's book from India: Vaj wrote: Unless, of course, if the Vedas are a Apparently there is a close linguistic affinity between the Mitannians and the Indo-Aryans in respect in cuneiform, which contains the so-called Horse Treatise by a Mitannian named Kikkuli. This was also found at Boghazkoy according to Frawley. Well that is interesting you use Frawley for your argument since Frawley dates the Mahabharata at something like 7,000 years ago. Ironic eh? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] The Secret, of Fairfield
http://www.youtube.com/user/aardvarkansaw
Re: [FairfieldLife] Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
Doesn't matter I still agree with a lot of what he has said. I just dont know who he is aligned with ... I do believe Obama should have just left it alone. But people do what they do. His time at the NPC was lite hearted playing he looked more like a clown than anything else he definitely did not appear to be Anti American his opinions are just that opinions. WHY IS THAT NOT ACCEPTABLE Pat Robertson has opinions no one is denouncing him Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Louis, I do not like the tone of the subject heading at all. Seems awfully petty to me, seems like some folks are trying to make you look bad for having admired the wrong man. A phrase like, Whose side are you on? is particularly stupid. This is not a matter of taking sides. So please just ignore those comments. Consider their source. a --- Louis McKenzie wrote: I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Gee, Louis, looks like Obama no longer likes Wright
I AGREE new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frankly, I like that Obama has a Rev Wright. I wish the crudeness of current American politics did not force him to disown the good Rev. Straight talking, perhaps emphatic, even hypebole-driven connections can be balancing, invigorating and insightful. I hope Barack keeps Wright as part of a transparent brain-trust and kitchen cabinet. Politics today is so afraid of speaking something resembling the truth. Its largely pandering. Few want to be told that we have responsibilities, we have blames, we have burdens. America is not the great shining knight of righteousness that it could have been. It has goodness. And a lot of baggage, corruption, weak thinking and calloused hearts. I think Lincoln and Jefferson would weep at viewing today's America. Wright is a force, not alone, but one of many, together that can help steer us back to the highest form of the American Spirit. I hope Barack keeps the door open to Wright. If he doesn't, he is less different than Hill than I would like to believe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander wrote: Louis, I do not like the tone of the subject heading at all. Seems awfully petty to me, seems like some folks are trying to make you look bad for having admired the wrong man. A phrase like, Whose side are you on? is particularly stupid. This is not a matter of taking sides. So please just ignore those comments. Consider their source. a --- Louis McKenzie wrote: I dont understand what is going on or why? Wright maybe working with the Clintons. Or it may be something to keep people from dropping off. I cant tell. shempmcgurk wrote: What to do, Louis? You've expressed your admiration for BOTH Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama. Yet now Sen. Obama has REALLY distanced himself from the good reverend: http://tinyurl.com/3kcnbb Whose side are you on? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Mahabharata
from Wiki: Traditionally, Hindus ascribe the authorship of the Mahâbhârata to Vyasa. Because of its immense length, its philological study has a long history of attempts to unravel its historical growth and composition layers. Its earliest layers date back to the late Vedic period (ca. 5th c. BC) and it probably reached its final form in the early Gupta period (ca. 4th c. AD).
