Re: [Vo]:[OT] Sent a message of query off to Mr. Beaty concerning recent trolling activity

[leaking pen]

Well, it just came to my attention from the B list that somehow I got
unsubscribed a while back and been too busy to notice, so I just rejoined
the list a few days back, I can't honestly say. But I'll keep my eyes out.

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 8:42 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

> I just sent off a brief message to Mr. Beaty asking if he could take a
> moment of his time to assess whether what I personally perceive to be an
> increase in trolling activity originating from certain anonymous
> individuals (whose names shall not be mentioned here to avoid email
> filters) might need to be addressed.
>
> ** **
>
> It’s generally not my policy to pester Mr. Beaty as we all have busy lives
> that need attending to. However, I am getting concerned.
>
> ** **
>
> It was just my own personal opinion that I expressed to Mr. Beaty. As a
> single opinion I don’t carry that much weight. It’s more likely to be the
> collective opinions of the Collective that will carry the necessary weight.
> Therefore, others who might feel concerned about recent trolling activity
> might want to drop Bill a line. Be sure to express your own opinion. BE
> BRIEF!!!
>
> ** **
>
> I did mention the fact that, IMHO, posting clearly marked Off Topic [OT]
> discussions is a perfectly healthy activity for Vortex-l participants, as
> long as the intention is not to incite undue aggravation among other
> members. Unfortunately, certain trolls  have been abusing that privilege.
> IMHO, it might be time to address the matter, administratively.
>
> ** **
>
> My 2 cents
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,
>
> Steven Vincent Johnson
>
> www.OrionWorks.com
>
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>

Re: [Vo]:test

[leaking pen]

didnt get it. sorry.

On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 9:14 PM William Beaty  wrote:

> test
>
>

[Vo]:Wing tip vortices of an owl

[leaking pen]

https://mobile.twitter.com/snake_flyer/status/1232176873481920513

BILL!  check out the video, vortices off the wingtips of an owl in flight.

Re: [Vo]:Corona Virus

[leaking pen]

"seen from space"  ugh.  they dug two 300 foot trenches in an existing
cemetery.  a couple hundred graves, which matches existing numbers.  no
"pits"

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 9:42 AM JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Here is a visual synopsis – burial trenches in Iran -  large enough to be
> seen from space …
>
>
>
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/iran-coronavirus-outbreak-graves/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Esa Ruoho 
>
>
>
> d'you have a TL;DW synopsis for us, Ron?
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Covid 19 from Wuhan BSL4

[leaking pen]

WASHINGTON — The Energy Department concluded with "low confidence"
that the Covid-19
pandemic

"likely"
originated from a laboratory leak

in
Wuhan, China, according to a classified report delivered to key lawmakers
on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, two sources with direct
knowledge told NBC News.

Thats... not how reports work.  On the question of, is it likely that covid
came from a lab leak, the data says, low confidence.

That means NO. it did not .


On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 9:02 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:

> According to the DoE new intelligence:
>
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a
>

Re: [Vo]:Covid 19 from Wuhan BSL4

[leaking pen]

I take it you have had absolutely no training in statistical analysis?
because that is not what that means in the slightest. when you are doing a
confidence study using statistical analysis of existing data. You make an
assertion. like you would make a hypothesis in a scientific study. and then
you say what your confidence is in that assertion. So it's not a matter of
the data saying it was likely. That is the starting assertion : "We assert
that it is likely that the pandemic was caused by a leak."  and then, you
say how confident you are in whether or not the assertion is correct. in
this case low confidence.

It is exactly the same as if you made a hypothesis in a scientific
experiment, we think that X variable has this much of an impact on Y
process.  and then your result is whether or not your hypothesis was true.
and a rating in a statistical survey of low confidence is basically like
like saying P approaches 1.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023, 5:56 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> leaking pen  wrote:
>
> WASHINGTON — The Energy Department concluded with "low confidence" that
>> the Covid-19 pandemic
>> <https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/covid-19-urges-investigation-chinese-wuhan-lab-leak-theory-rcna32910>
>>  "likely"
>> originated from a laboratory leak
>> <https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191>
>>  in
>> Wuhan . . .
>>
>
>> Thats... not how reports work.  On the question of, is it likely that
>> covid came from a lab leak, the data says, low confidence.
>>
>> That means NO. it did not .
>>
>
> Putting aside the issue of COVID, I think the expression:
>
> "conclude with low confidence that X is likely . . ."
>
> . . . is a convoluted way of saying: "X is probably true, but the evidence
> is thin and it is only somewhat probable. Slightly more probable than not."
>
> It is a confusing, poorly framed way of saying this, but I think that is
> what it means. I wouldn't want to have to translate it into Japanese.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A prediction about future computers

[leaking pen]

my laptop coming back from a hibernate function, 2 gigs of ram, takes
about twice as long as the initial boot.  i dont use hibernate
anymore, i just shutdown and then restart.

and, nothing ever works right after coming back from hibernate.

Again, ive not used newer macs, but both my classic II and my power
mac had the same issue.  I never used hibernate, as it just didn't
work right.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>>
>> My point is that nothing happens between system clock pulses.  The state
>> of a computer remains unchanged.  With fast and cheap NV memory, you could
>> build a PC that could literally suspend its state between processor pulses
>> and instantly  restore the PC to the state before suspension.
>
> I do not see how this would be any faster than a conventional battery-backed
> up computer in a wait state. What I mean is, we can accomplish the same
> thing today.
>
> It would draw no power and be immune to power outages, of course. For some
> applications that would be a tremendous advantage. Especially dedicated
> control and data collection devices. But a regular PC "wakes up" from
> hibernation and reloads 4 GB of RAM quickly. It is not a bit annoying.
>
>
>>
>> Many believe that the memristor could provide such an operation. BIOS, OS,
>> video, processor cache, all memories would be NV and totally freezable such
>> that no bootstrapping would ever  occur (except with MicroSoft products
>> which would have to be restarted after the blue screen of death)  :-)
>
> Even without a complete blue-screen of death crash, and even with other
> operating systems, garbage collection is imperfect and programs fail partly,
> so from time to time you have to completely reboot. Especially programs such
> as voice input, Acrobat reader and anything to do with graphics or video.
>
> A process control computer, such as the one driving a Prius or a Boeing 747,
> must have an emergency reboot and reload RAM procedure. It has to happen in
> a fraction of a second. So it cannot load from a disk, obviously. As far as
> I know, it goes back to Byte 0 of a ROM chip and starts from scratch, and
> whatever is in RAM is g-o-n-e.
>
> I suppose the hardest part for the programmer is to determine that the
> program has crashed and it is time to issue an emergency interrupt and
> reset. I recall that Data General computers used in critical apps used to
> have an auxiliary microcomputer checking the main computer, standing by
> ready to goose the main computer when it did not respond. The aux computer
> spend all day asking: "You okay? Still okay? Still there? Still okay? . . ."
> No response -- bam! If they both go out to lunch what do you do then? I
> guess the main one can check the aux one from time to time. Not likely they
> will both go out at the same moment.
>
> Years ago, Toyota issued a recall for Prius computers that were locking up
> and crashing while the vehicle was underway at high speed. That's scary!
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Predictions for 2009

[leaking pen]

I agree with the Hef, however I myself am immune from this prophecy,
as I will be always accurate! COME!  flock to me, and I shall show you
the way.
(make your deposit to our fund at the door.  Visa, MC, AMEX all accepted. )

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
> Richard has asked for predictions for 2009.  My prediction for 2009 is that
> a common thread for the year will be the failure to predict.  Prophesies
> with durations of days, weeks, months, and years will fail in unusual
> abundance. False prophets will abound, especially in the financial realm. I
> think it is clear to many people that we are in a regime of instability,
> financially, socially, and environmentally.
>
> The lesson to be taken from this is to prepare as best as possible for all
> contingencies.  This is always good advice, but more so than ever in a time
> of instability.  Prepare to take care of yourself and family, and beyond
> that your extended family and even neighbors if possible, in the event of
> major disruptions.  The best investment a person can make is 6 months or
> more worth of food and a means to cook it.  This can be done fairly
> inexpensively using whole grains, dried foods, vitamins, and possibly some
> canned goods.  My prediction is it will be a comfort knowing you can eat for
> a while if the worst happens, and that at for at least for some increment of
> time you will not be a burden on your family, neighbors and society in a
> time of great need.  Make a plan.  Consider what you will need in various
> scenarios.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Lotteries vs casino gambling

[leaking pen]

enh.  i have more fun for longer with my money gambling at a casino.
the lottery is fun for a minute, then done.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
>
> On Jan 3, 2009, at 5:37 AM, Taylor J. Smith wrote:
>
> Quoting Pascal, "Lotteries are a tax on fools."
>
> Pascal is certainly right about that, especially when they are used to
> directly offset taxes, which is why not only the fools like lotteries, but
> also those who see them as means to avoid taxes, and those who profit
> directly from running them. As insidious as monthly lotteries in lieu of
> taxes might be, they are benign in comparison to various forms of casino
> gambling.  In some communities, gambling produces more costs for the
> communities than revenue, due to the small community take and the demand on
> public services, insurance companies, public safety, and the legal/penal
> system.
>
> It might be asked why a monthly lottery with a 50 percent take and less than
> a chance in a million of winning could be considered far less harmful and
> addictive than, say, betting red or black in roulette, which has an about
> 5.263 percent house take and nearly even chances of winning each bet.  The
> answer is that the roulette player typically places much more than a single
> bet.  According to Ian B William's Slot Machines: Fun Machines or Tax
> Machines, $51 billion a year is spent in the US on casino gambling, and
> about 70 percent of that on slot machines.  If the typical gambler bet only
> a few times, then each slot machine and table would have lines of people
> going out the door and down the street.  This is not what you see at
> casinos.  People bet repeatedly for long periods. Repeated betting increases
> the expected house win amount drastically.
> To see which is better, a monthly lottery or roulette, take a look at the
> expected purse amounts for the two alternatives over the one month period of
> the lottery.  If a gambler has $100 to bet for that time he will likely
> gamble it all away.  His expected purse value after the 100 hours or so of
> roulette gambling time possible during the month will be a tiny fraction of
> a cent.  If a roulette wheel has 38 slots then 2 will be without color (or
> green, house take) and 18 will be black and 18 red. The house take will be
> about 5.26 cents per dollar bet.  Due to a typical house $5 minimum the
> gambler's $100 will likely only be a 20 bet purse.  If allowed to make $1
> bets the gambler will have a 100 bet purse and can expect to be broke in
> less than 1900 bets, or less than about 19 hours of betting.  He will
> probably try to obtain even more money with which to vindicate himself.  The
> following table shows in 100 bet intervals the probability of being broke
> and the expected value of the purse for roulette color bettors that start
> with a 20 bet purse.
>
> Number of bets in better's starting purse 20
> House percentage = 5.263  percent
>  Bet  Prob. Alive   Expected Value
>   -----
>  100  0.88108326738214.891433066690
>  200  0.61984849851010.952448130541
>  300  0.435274926086 8.199805170679
>  400  0.313261560357 6.245178037378
>  500  0.230621461565 4.823106110599
> 1000  0.062016797315 1.514700202615
> 2000  0.007334798455 0.206508730270
> 3000  0.001127300806 0.034033899035
> 4000  0.000195968405 0.006173086380
> 5000  0.36627971 0.001187554885
> 6000  0.07182650 0.000237810615
> 6900  0.01707388 0.57358537
> The roulette gambler at a 5.263 percent house take and a $100 to bet at $5 a
> bet can expect to be broke in less than 3 hours.  In fact, from the table,
> you can see that at bet 300, about 3 hours, he has a 43.5274926086 percent
> chance of being alive.  He has about 1.7 chances in a million of lasting
> 6900 bets, or about 69 hours of betting during the month, and only a small
> fraction of a cent expected purse value by that time.
> At $5 a bet and 100 bets an hour he can be expected to lose 0.05263 * $5/bet
> * 100 bets/hour = $26.32 per hour.  If he has 100 hours to gamble in the
> month, and does so, he can be expected to lose about $2,632 per month.  The
> estimated 100 bets per hour may be high, and a lower bet rate will reduce
> the expected loss per hour.
> The lottery ticket buyer probably will not even spend the full $100 on
> tickets, unless there are lots of quick turnaround small pots, which will in
> fact act just like casino gambling.  A single large pot can be expected to
> attract out of state money - especially when no winner shows up and the
> expected win becomes positive on a subsequent "let it ride" round.  But let
> us assume the lottery player does spend the full $100 on the lottery in
> order to compare apples to apples.  Lotteries typically take about half the
> proceeds.  The $100 provides about a $50 expected purse at the end, as
> opposed to the small expected fraction of a cent purse for the roulette
> gambler tha

Re: [Vo]:Lotteries vs casino gambling

[leaking pen]

not really.  Its fun when i buy the ticket, and when i check the
numbers.  I forget about it in the meantime, mostly, other than
occasional, what would we do with teh money, conversations.

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 1:47 PM, John Berry  wrote:
> Compared to roulette the lottery makes lots of sense because with the latter
> there is a very real even if very small chance of becoming truly wealthy
> with a very small investment.
>
> Where the roulette player must have a larger purse and has no chance of
> making the kind of money a lottery player might, and since wealth is not
> going to find him in a single spin then he has to choose where to quit so he
> is more likely to lose it.
>
> I am not aware of any one armed bandit that has a payout as large as a
> lottery payout, but as mentioned the frequency of play makes it more likely
> to be costly.
>
> There are plenty of people who have a fortune made from lottery winnings,
> however there are I am sure very few people who have made millions with very
> little starting capital from roulette or craps and managed to not give it
> all back to the casino.
>
> Now spending a lot on a lottery is foolish as you are still probably going
> to lose, playing every week/month is foolish as is buying many tickets or
> using the same numbers, but it does make sense to buy one once in a while
> with a few spare bucks.
>
> Without an extraordinarily asymmetrical payout or an element of skill
> gambling makes no sense.
>
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 6:30 AM, leaking pen  wrote:
>>
>> enh.  i have more fun for longer with my money gambling at a casino.
>> the lottery is fun for a minute, then done.
>
>
> Isn't it fun from the purchase through to the draw?
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Horace Heffner 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Jan 3, 2009, at 5:37 AM, Taylor J. Smith wrote:
>> >
>> > Quoting Pascal, "Lotteries are a tax on fools."
>> >
>> > Pascal is certainly right about that, especially when they are used to
>> > directly offset taxes, which is why not only the fools like lotteries,
>> > but
>> > also those who see them as means to avoid taxes, and those who profit
>> > directly from running them. As insidious as monthly lotteries in lieu of
>> > taxes might be, they are benign in comparison to various forms of casino
>> > gambling.  In some communities, gambling produces more costs for the
>> > communities than revenue, due to the small community take and the demand
>> > on
>> > public services, insurance companies, public safety, and the legal/penal
>> > system.
>> >
>> > It might be asked why a monthly lottery with a 50 percent take and less
>> > than
>> > a chance in a million of winning could be considered far less harmful
>> > and
>> > addictive than, say, betting red or black in roulette, which has an
>> > about
>> > 5.263 percent house take and nearly even chances of winning each bet.
>> >  The
>> > answer is that the roulette player typically places much more than a
>> > single
>> > bet.  According to Ian B William's Slot Machines: Fun Machines or Tax
>> > Machines, $51 billion a year is spent in the US on casino gambling, and
>> > about 70 percent of that on slot machines.  If the typical gambler bet
>> > only
>> > a few times, then each slot machine and table would have lines of people
>> > going out the door and down the street.  This is not what you see at
>> > casinos.  People bet repeatedly for long periods. Repeated betting
>> > increases
>> > the expected house win amount drastically.
>> > To see which is better, a monthly lottery or roulette, take a look at
>> > the
>> > expected purse amounts for the two alternatives over the one month
>> > period of
>> > the lottery.  If a gambler has $100 to bet for that time he will likely
>> > gamble it all away.  His expected purse value after the 100 hours or so
>> > of
>> > roulette gambling time possible during the month will be a tiny fraction
>> > of
>> > a cent.  If a roulette wheel has 38 slots then 2 will be without color
>> > (or
>> > green, house take) and 18 will be black and 18 red. The house take will
>> > be
>> > about 5.26 cents per dollar bet.  Due to a typical house $5 minimum the
>> > gambler's $100 will likely only be a 20 bet purse.  If allowed to make
>> > $1
>> > bets the gambler will have a 100 bet purse and can expect to be broke in
>> > les

Re: [Vo]:anomolous topographical map

[leaking pen]

Yeah, but its pravda, so what can you expect?

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:18 AM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> Thomas sez:
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:42 AM, thomas malloy  wrote:
>> Vortexians:
>>
>> I have heard of ancient maps from, as I recall, Ripley's Believe It or Not.
>> When I heard about this ancient relief map, I thought of you. Those of you
>> who have been following the Black Light Power saga have heard about
>> Randell's novel materials, I call your attention to the coating on the map.
>>
>> http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/04/30/28149.html
>
> I must confess that I love hearing about these kinds of stories, even
> if it is OT. Thanks Thomas. Unfortunately, what I find frustrating
> about most of these "articles" is that more often than not they are
> all talk and no substance. Instead of telling me about all the
> mysterious artifacts discovered on the "plate" why don't they at least
> include a few pictures to back up their claims. For cripes sake, show
> me some physical evidence! There's no point wasting time speculating
> on some mysterious "plate" when I one is prevented from making
> personal evaluations.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Proposal for Discovery Channel, History, etc.

[leaking pen]

I could go for that.  Hell, you've got a webcam.  We've got a bunch of
people here with webcams. Have everyone thats able do a piece on
something that matters to them, have someone edit together a monthly
show from it, add some music, maybe get some graphics to go with (I'd
totally volunteer to do the editing and hosting of the videocast)

Call it SCIENCE!  (with humor)

Maybe add in some of your wonderful toys off the amasci page.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 12:06 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
> Some video show titles.  "Science education" works better if it moves
> hundreds of viewers to write angry letters ...and millions of show fans to
> shout them down!
>
>  The Mad Scientist (real 'crackpots' submitting their ideas for testing)
>
>  Ridiculed Maverick Vindicated! (History of the seamy side of science)
>
>  What is science, REALLY?  (Trial/error, or "Great Errors in Science")
>
>  Why is Science so hard?!  (debunking widespread myths of grade school)
>
>  How stuff REALLY works (debunking widespread explanations & wrong history)
>How electricity REALLY works  (debunk the massive widespread errors)
>How microscopes REALLY work (Leeuonhouk's great secret, & wrong texts)
>How motors REALLY work  (add light bulbs, Gramme's accidental discv)
>
>  Greatest amateur discoveries (History of non-scientist inventors)
>
>  Whistleblowing science textbooks (get a billion-dollar industry mad at you)
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

see, from my point of view, i want a kindle, but i have no intention
of using it to view images, just text.  you know?

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> As everyone probably knows, a new Kindle was introduced today. The big
> change from my point of view is the screen:
>
> Old: 450 x 550, 4 shades of gray
>
> New: 600 x 800, 16 shades of gray
>
> This should improve the display of images. I just finished shrinking 77
> images down to the old standard size (leaving them in color), so this is a
> little annoying. But it is the story of my life. I am always chasing after
> new standards but I never catch up with them, like a dog chasing a car.
> Anyway, it will be a long time before there are significant number of the
> new Kindle units, so the old standard will be fine for a while.
>
> I imagine some of the people who bought the old model Kindle are also
> feeling annoyed, but this is what happens to people who buy early model
> gadgets.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

I picked up java software to facilitate reading novels on my cell back
in 2002, with a 2 inch by 1 inch screen.  REALLY hard on the eyes.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> The Kindle 2 screen size is 4.8" high, 3.6" width, 6" diameter (15.3 cm
> diameter). The weight is just over 10 oz (280 g). This is about the same
> page size and weight as a 517-page paperback book on my shelf. (A book by
> David Hume.)
>
> Paperback book size (h, w): 7" x 4", 1.25" thick, page size excluding
> margins: 6" x 3.5"
>
> Kindle 2 overall gadget size: 8" x 5.3", 0.36" thick, page size excluding
> gadget 4.8" x 3.6" (as I said) So it is about an inch shorter.
>
> The book has 43 lines per page, probably 10 point font, with 429 words on
> one particular page, as follows:
>
> "no more contradiction than the affirmation, that it will rise. We should in
> vain, therefore, attempt to demonstrate its falsehood. Were it
> demonstratively false, it would imply a contradiction, and could never be
> distinctly conceived by the mind.
>
> It may, therefore, be a subject worthy of curiosity, to enquire what is the
> nature of that evidence which assures us of any real existence and matter of
> fact, beyond the present testimony of our senses, or the records of our
> memory. This part of philosophy, it is observable, has been little
> cultivated, either by the ancients or moderns; and therefore our doubts and
> errors, in the prosecution of so important an enquiry, may be the more
> excusable; while we march through such difficult paths without any guide or
> direction. They may even prove useful, by exciting curiosity, and destroying
> that implicit faith and security, which is the bane of all reasoning and
> free enquiry. The discovery of defects in the common philosophy, if any such
> there be, will not, I presume, be a discouragement, but rather an
> incitement, as is usual, to attempt something more full and satisfactory
> than has yet been proposed to the public.
>
> All reasonings concerning matter of fact seem to be founded on the relation
> of Cause and Effect. By means of that relation alone we can go beyond the
> evidence of our memory and senses. If you were to ask a man, why he believes
> any matter of fact, which is absent; for instance, that his friend is in the
> country, or in France; he would give you a reason; and this reason would be
> some other fact; as a letter received from him, or the knowledge of his
> former resolutions and promises. A man finding a watch or any other machine
> in a desert island, would conclude that there had once been men in that
> island. All our reasonings concerning fact are of the same nature. And here
> it is constantly supposed that there is a connexion between the present fact
> and that which is inferred from it. Were there nothing to bind them
> together, the inference would be entirely precarious. The hearing of an
> articulate voice and rational discourse in the dark assures us of the
> presence of some person: Why? because these are the effects of the human
> make and fabric, and closely connected with it. If we anatomize all the
> other reasonings of this nature, we shall find that they are founded on the
> relation of cause and effect, and that this relation is either near or
> remote, direct or collateral."
>
> - David Hume, "AN ENQUIRY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING"
>
> http://18th.eserver.org/hume-enquiry.html
>
> Based on my experience with the Kindle emulator, I doubt you could fit that
> much text on the screen, even with the smallest font.
>
> One nice thing about the Kindle is that you can zoom up the text size. I
> find this old book with 10 point text kind of hard to read. The Kindle 2.0
> will read the text aloud.
>
> I believe this 7" x 4" format is the smallest paperback book in common use
> in the U.S. Incidentally, Japanese paperback books ("bunkobon") are smaller:
> 6" x 4.25". Actual page size excluding margins: 5" x 3.25". Almost the same
> as the Kindle!
>
> I predict these things will be a huge hit in Japan, if anyone there still
> reads books when Amazon gets around to introducing them. Japanese publishers
> are conservative and I predict they will not introduce them, although at
> present there is a widespread fad of reading novels on cell phones, which
> are specially written to be read in very short segments.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

You touched on something im working with right now, actually.  Voice
input for recording, or for direct speech to text applications?  and,
what mic are you using?

That said, I dont like the IPHONE.  i have a nice small brick that
makes phone calls, and is an mp3 player.  (sony erricson walkman
cobranded phone.  I get better audio quality from it than i do from a
friends ipod, teh same headphones and file being used. )

I want a nice sized screen for reading a book.  If i can get something
with a screen the size of a paperback, im good.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>> . . . why buy two similar handhelds if the iPhone can do the book task
>> almost as well?
>
> Answer: People who read a lot do not want one that is "almost as good"; they
> want the best possible gadget for the job, even if they have to spend $360
> extra. It is worth it. For the same reason, I am happy to pay $170 a voice
> input microphone, even though others that are "almost as good" cost only
> $50. It saves me countless hours of searching for voice input errors. It is
> worth $120 extra to me.
>
> If they could make a Kindle with a larger screen, more suitable for
> newspapers and magazines, that weighs less than 1 lb, I expect they could
> sell it for $1,000. The audience would be limited, but it would be much
> larger than it might have been a few years ago, because many people now
> realize the benefits of the gadget. People sometimes have to learn the value
> of new technology; it is not always readily apparent.
>
> It is surprising how often people fail to realize the benefits of a new
> technology, even when the benefits are obvious in retrospect. A classic
> example was the world's first telegraph, installed between Baltimore and
> Washington DC in 1828. It cost an enormous amount compared to subsequent
> installations, and it was paid for by the U.S. Government -- like so much
> other cutting-edge, futuristic technology. For the first several weeks it
> was open to the public, no one used it because no one saw any benefit to
> instantaneous communication with Baltimore. A few years later, telegraphs
> were one of the largest businesses in the world. Even so, in 1846, Thoreau
> famously wrote:
>
> "As with our colleges, so with a hundred 'modern improvements'; there is an
> illusion about them; there is not always a positive advance. . . . Our
> inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from
> serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end. . . . We
> are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas;
> but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate."
>
> You still find Luddites who say the Internet and computers are overrated, or
> more trouble than they are worth, and we should stick to printed newspapers,
> fountain pens, typewriters and so on. Some cold fusion researchers, who
> shall remain nameless, feel that serious scientists should publish only in
> printed paper journals, not on the Internet.
>
>
>> It is kinda-like the computer printers these days, where they practically
>> give away the nice printer but then rob you with the high priced ink. Lesson
>> there: get a laser printer instead.
>
> I recommend an HP Officejet Pro K550 inkjet printer instead of a laser
> printer. The printer is a bit more expensive going in, but the black
> cartridge holds 17 ml of ink, and it is far cheaper per page than others.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

my understanding, ALL kindle books that arent free are a flat 10. its
only cheaper when compared to hardcover.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> The other thing to bear in mind about the Kindle is that the cost of the
> books is somewhat cheaper than the printed editions. I read this somewhere.
> I have not checked closely but here is one chosen at random that costs $10
> on Kindle and $16.50 on paper (G. Ifill, "The Breakthrough")
>
> On the other hand, Obama's book costs $10 on Kindle and only $8 on paper. It
> seems most books cost $10 on Kindle . . .
>
> Here is one by A. C. Clarke, "Fountains of Paradise," $8 on Kindle, $18
> paperback.
>
> The pricing is confusing, but anyway, I suppose that people who read many
> books may soon recoup the $360 cost of the gadget.
>
> It stands to reason that electronic books are cheaper, and will remain
> cheaper, since they cost so little to distribute. Amazon.com does not have a
> monopoly for e-books. Google is coming after them. All publishers will soon
> realize they have to compete.
>
> I have been keeping tabs on the distribution cost of electronic documents
> closely for many years now because I pay for LENR-CANR.org. (It used to be a
> large burden but it is no longer, I am happy to report.) The decline in cost
> per megabyte is astounding, even to someone used to computers. My guess is
> that this correlates with the decline in hard disk storage costs perhaps
> even more than fiber optic and other falling telecommunications costs. Last
> I checked, hard disk cost per unit of capacity (bytes, in this case) has
> fallen even more dramatically than any other computer components, such as
> RAM memory bytes or CPU cycles.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

www.alexandraerin.com  is a website of a woman who has been making a
living for over a year now, writing, and putting her writing up online
for free.  She sells pdf's of completed volumes, a small amount of
other merchandise, and advertising.  The concept is really starting to
kick off, and in much the way that traditional comics are feeling the
crunch from webcomics, traditional publishing will feel the crunch
from web books.  In fact, I run a website dedicated to giving web
space and editorial services to people who wish to publish their books
online, but have no clue how to go about it.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> From: Jed Rothwell writes,
>
>> The pricing is confusing, but anyway, I suppose that people who read many
>> books may soon recoup the $360 cost of the gadget.
>
> Not if they use the library, of course.
>
> For example, I read ... err... well I check out from various libraries over
> 200 books per year (most returned partially read) and will buy maybe 10 -
> often, after I have already read the free one. Anyway my library, and many
> others with good electronic networks, have had ebooks available for checkout
> for a long while. Many rare titles are available this way.
>
> There can be a cost associated with this, but most titles are free.
>
> Here is a webpage for the main system, but there are other online digital
> systems available systems for free distribution of ebooks, as well. Most
> 'trendy' titles are not found online.
>
> http://califa.lib.overdrive.com/F75B0AD9-A8B0-445D-A0F7-81DAAA226A07/10/246/en/Default.htm
>
> This kind of thing might throw a wrench into Amazon's plans to make big$$
> but most of us look at the novel (or even music) as an entertainment service
> - and want to "tip" when appropriate. The author can (in theory) actually
> make more this way than paper publishing, but the consumer is not yet
> accustomed to the process.
>
> In 2000, Steven King published a serialized novel, "The Plant" over the web,
> bypassing paper publication. At first it was presumed that he had abandoned
> cpntinuation of the project because of little remuneration, but he later
> stated that he had simply "run out of stories." Too bad.
>
> Most fiction writers, I believe, would prefer to get a dollar per novel from
> 10 million readers than $10 from one million - just from the exposure and
> for the advantage of accumulating a large fan base.
>
> Hard to properly value 'goodwill' ...
>
> Jones
>

Re: [Vo]:New Kindle specs

[leaking pen]

A LOT of people carry books aroudn with them, in backpacks,
briefcases, ect.  I often have 2 to 3 full sized books in my backpack,
which i take everywhere.  I would much rather a single kindle.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>> The Kindle 2 screen size is 4.8" high, 3.6" width, 6" diameter (15.3 cm
>> diameter). The weight is just over 10 oz (280 g). This is about the same
>> page size and weight as a 517-page paperback book on my shelf. (A book
>> by David Hume.)
>
> I don't generally carry 500+ page books around with me.  I choose
> slimmer volumes when I'm going out.
>
>>
>> Paperback book size (h, w): 7" x 4", 1.25" thick, page size excluding
>> margins: 6" x 3.5"
>
> Palm Pilot size:
>
> 4 3/4" x 3" x 5/8" thick
>
> Palm wins running away.
>
>
>> Kindle 2 overall gadget size: 8" x 5.3", 0.36" thick, page size
>> excluding gadget 4.8" x 3.6" (as I said) So it is about an inch shorter.
>
> But it's an inch longer than the book, and it's an inch wider -- and the
> book was already awkwardly large for a lot of pockets.  (Compared to a
> Palm Pilot, the Kindle is an outrageous pig.)
>
> This sounds to me like it's too big to fit in a pocket.  Consequently, a
> Palm Pilot is far more useful in many circumstances, even with its
> wretched screen and lousy OS.
>
> A Kindle at home takes the place of a book (which I can easily carry
> around the house) or a computer screen (which is already in the house).
>  A Kindle on-the-go doesn't take the place of anything; it's too big so
> I'd leave it home.
>
> So, right now it's just a toy: it does jobs which other things we
> already had also do, but doesn't do those job a whole lot better than
> what we already had.
>
> A Palm Pilot at home takes the place of a book, and on the go it does
> too, because it's small enough to take along easily.  So, it does a job
> things we already had do *not* do:  It lets me take along large books in
> a format that fits easily in a pocket.
>
> Consequence:  I bet there are a lot of Kindles gathering dust.
>
> Wake me up when they make folding Kindles, right not I'm not interested,
> thanks.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:leave my poor LEGOs out of this!!

[leaking pen]

Actually, Heinlein didn't invent the phrase, its known use for a LONG
time, and was often also written as tinstaafl, (there is no such..),
but Heinlein used the bastardized version for the official motto of
the Luna colony.  I'd not ever seen it just tns, but i have seen it as
tafl (leaving off the extra a for a) so removing the modifier is or
ain't isn't too inapropriate for a lettered shortening. It happens in
acronym making.

As for the bet, it was actually Harlan Ellison that made the bet
originally, at a writers retreat, and then others got in on the
action.  The lot of them there (Ellison, Hubbard, Heinlein, Leguin,
and Card, i know were there, i forget the other notables listed, ill
dig out the essay Ellison wrote about it) spent several hours
brainstorming a religion, and playing ideas off each other.  While
L.Ron sat there taking notes.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> UR right.  It's impossible to pronounce without the 'A'.
>
> Terry (who grew up saying "ain't" but got over it)
>
> PS Forgive me Mr. Heinlein.  You know, there is an anecdote that
> $cientology resulted from a bet between RAH and LRH.  Heinlein bet
> Hubbard that he could not create a religion that the IRS would
> recognize.  I wonder if Heinlein paid up?  Hail Xenu!
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>> I see a nit!!
>>
>> It was actually "TANSTAAFL" (which is more pronounceable)  and it stands
>> for "There Ain't No  " and so forth.  At least, that's what it was
>> in Mistress.  (Didn't recall that the slogan appeared in Stranger.)
>>
>> But, don't take my word for it -- let's ask Google.
>>
>> Search for TNSTAAFL:16,100 hits
>>
>> Search for TANSTAAFL:  216,000 hits
>>
>> So the websites of the world vote 13 to 1 in favor of TANSTAAFL.
>>
>>
>> Terry Blanton wrote:
>>> Yep, Robert Heinlein "Stranger in a Strange Land".  Also mentioned in
>>> "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress".
>>>
>>> Terry
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 10:33 PM, thomas malloy  
>>> wrote:
 OrionWorks wrote:

>> From Terry:
>
>> Watch the spin and you will see a beat frequency between the camera
>>
>>
>> TNSTAAFL
>>
>> Yup, I noticed that too, bro. Especially in the beginning. However, in
>> the last segment the wheel RPM "appeared" (at least to me) to have
>> stabilized somewhat. Perhaps that was an optical illusion.
>>
>> BTW: TNSTAAFL: Please translate.
>>
 There is no such thing as a free lunch



 --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
 http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---


>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Has Atlantis Been Found . . .

[leaking pen]

in addition, why just that spot?  oh... wait... if you follow the odd
curving line to the right, it joins a larger line, follow it up and
right, and... more grids, on a curved surface, but a completely
different angle, like they were made to fit the curve of land, and
closer to teh surface, thus larger... and you can see erosion marks in
it.  hmmm.  and other features leading up and to the left towards
madeira.

have some more madeira, mdear.

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:04 PM,   wrote:
> In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 20 Feb 2009 08:36:17 -0500:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>
>
> Google says:-
>
> "A spokeswoman said: "Bathymetric (or sea floor terrain) data is often 
> collected
> from boats using sonar to take measurements of the sea floor.
>
> "The lines reflect the path of the boat as it gathers the data."
>
> However this doesn't make sense. A random collection of such lines wouldn't 
> all
> be rectangular, unless it was a deliberate search grid, and why would a
> deliberate search grid be chosen just at that spot, unless they thought there
> was something there worth mapping?
>
> I smell conspiracy. :)
>
>>Go back to sleep.  Google says "no":
>>
>>http://newslite.tv/2009/02/20/city-of-atlantis-not-found-on.html
>>
>>On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
>>> This one has the coordinates:
>>>
>>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/google/4731313/Google-Ocean-Has-Atlantis-been-found-off-Africa.html
>>>
>>> http://snipurl.com/caqv2  [www_telegraph_co_uk]
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
 . . . on Google Earth?

 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2255989.ece

 It sure looks like it.

 Terry


>>>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Gasoline Tax Replacement

[leaking pen]

how about the companies SELLING and making a profit on those goods?

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 6:44 PM,   wrote:
> In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:22:35 -0500:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>>By fair, I meant the fuel tax was relatively fair in that the weight
>>of the vehicle, the damage to the roads, and the cost of the tax was
>>related.
>>
>>The mileage tax would be more fair if the weight of the vehicle was
>>somehow included.
>>
>>Terry
> A large part of the wear and tear on the roads is caused by trucks carrying
> goods that everyone uses, so taking the money out of general revenue is not 
> all
> that unfair, and it's administratively much simpler and therefore more
> efficient.
> I thought a huge tax on tires might work, but that would only encourage people
> to drive way too long on a set of tires, which would be dangerous.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Gasoline Tax Replacement

[leaking pen]

This, unfortunately.

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 5:51 AM, R C Macaulay  wrote:
> That's no longer the way the game is played. Jack up the price, skim the
> money to offshore and Pay NO tax.
> Richard
>
>
>> In reply to  leaking pen's message of Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:56:07 -0700:
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> how about the companies SELLING and making a profit on those goods?
>>
>> The more profit they make, the more they pay in company taxes, which goes
>> into
>> general revenue.
>> [snip]
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

And doing so on an open list, not private email.  which means he has a
right to respond as well.

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 3:53 PM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> Grok,
>
> I was asking Thomas, not you.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Well, to go for classic evangelical christian belief, likely that
jesus is the son of god, died for our sins, and that salvation can
only come through him.  Oh, and that, even though Christ himself
rejected large parts of the laws of the old testament, you have to
follow them verbatim.  except shellfish and mixing fabrics.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:52 AM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> You brought up many interesting issues for which most are ripe for
> comment. I will try to restrain myself and endeavor to remain on-topic
> of this OT subject thread: The Rapture.
>
> I asked:
>
>>> I'm puzzled, Thomas. What are your criteria for qualification for
>>> rapture status?
>
> You replied with:
>
>> You need to believe and follow a path of righteousness.
>
> ...along with:
>
>> Unless you believe and pursue righteousness you will be excluded.
>> Your good deeds are as filthy rags in the sight of the L-rd.
>
> What are some of these righteous activities that must be believed in
> and pursued?
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Umm,

Leviticus 11:9-12 says:
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath
fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them
shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the
rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which
is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of
their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an
abomination unto you.

Deuteronomy 14:9-10 says:
9 These ye shall eat of all that are in the waters: all that have fins
and scales shall ye eat:
10 And whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is
unclean unto you.

So, NO SHELLFISH FOR YOU!

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> Well, to go for classic evangelical christian belief, likely that
>> jesus is the son of god, died for our sins, and that salvation can
>> only come through him.
>
> I think you leaked a word or two here; this sentence contains only
> dependent clauses.  What's the proposed righteous activity which goes
> with these assertions?
>
>
>>  Oh, and that, even though Christ himself
>> rejected large parts of the laws of the old testament, you have to
>> follow them verbatim.  except shellfish and mixing fabrics.
>
> Shellfish have never been required to follow the laws of the Old Testament.
>
> And of course some laws no longer apply, such as the one against eating
> four footed insects (Leviticus 11:20-23) since we now count six feet on
> all winged insects, AFAIK.
>
> On the other hand, if one accepts one popular "zero-error" explanation
> of that particular set of verses -- which is that the big hopping legs
> of grasshoppers, katydids, and so forth were not counted as "feet" --
> then, if one also accepts all the rest of the "except for" notes in that
> particular sequence of verses, then one must conclude that:
>
>  a) Locusts and their kin are OK to eat (they're called out
> specifically, "... you *may* eat ... those that have legs above their
> feet, with which to leap...")
>
>  b) Cockroaches, which either walk on six feet (when strolling) or *two*
>  (when they're really in a hurry), are certainly not "four footed"
> insects by anybody's measure, so .. it's also OK to eat cockroaches.
>
> Yum, chow down, guys!
>
>
>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:52 AM, OrionWorks  
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> You brought up many interesting issues for which most are ripe for
>>> comment. I will try to restrain myself and endeavor to remain on-topic
>>> of this OT subject thread: The Rapture.
>>>
>>> I asked:
>>>
>>>>> I'm puzzled, Thomas. What are your criteria for qualification for
>>>>> rapture status?
>>> You replied with:
>>>
>>>> You need to believe and follow a path of righteousness.
>>> ...along with:
>>>
>>>> Unless you believe and pursue righteousness you will be excluded.
>>>> Your good deeds are as filthy rags in the sight of the L-rd.
>
> It appears, based on this statement, that pursuing "righteousness" is at
> odds with doing "good deeds".
>
> Does this explain some of the behavior of some members of the Religious
> Right?
>
>
>>> What are some of these righteous activities that must be believed in
>>> and pursued?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Steven Vincent Johnson
>>> www.OrionWorks.com
>>> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Ohh, sorry.  My original comment was being sarcastic, in that you had
to follow all the laws of the old testament, except, it seems, EATING
shellfish or WEARING two fabrics at once, since most evangelicals seem
to feel those arent important anymore.

I figured that with a smart crowd like this, I didn't have to spell
out every letter of the refference.

Ohh, and backing up to your first response to me, I was just listing
off required beliefs, not behaviours.



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:

>
> This is getting a little surreal, methinks.  You're the one who excepted
> shellfish, not me -- but, as it happens, you didn't say what they were
> excepted from.  Being left to guess what the exception referred to, I
> merely observed that shellfish -- unlike people -- were never required
> to follow the Laws.  If an oyster chooses not to keep kosher nobody much
> cares.
>
> If you can see anywhere in the Bible where it says, say, a shrimp will
> be stoned if it picks up sticks on a Saturday, please point it out.
> (Surely it will be stoned if it chooses to live in the waters of a bong,
> but that's something else again...)
>
> In any case Deuteronomy is pseudepigraphic.  It was written hundreds of
> years after the other books of the Pentateuch, by priests fleeing from
> the fall of the Northern Kingdom.  So it doesn't count.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Sigh. So many forget that last one, and Jesus said he felt it the most
important commandment.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:14 PM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> OrionWorks wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> You brought up many interesting issues for which most are ripe for
>> comment. I will try to restrain myself and endeavor to remain on-topic
>> of this OT subject thread: The Rapture.
>>
>> I asked:
>>

 I'm puzzled, Thomas. What are your criteria for qualification for
 rapture status?

>>
>> You replied with:
>>
>>>
>>> You need to believe and follow a path of righteousness.
>>>
>>
>> ...along with:
>>
>>>
>>> Unless you believe and pursue righteousness you will be excluded.
>>> Your good deeds are as filthy rags in the sight of the L-rd.
>>>
>>> What are some of these righteous activities that must be believed in
>>> and pursued?
>>>
>>>
>
> Believe, be baptized, follow the 10 commandments, love your fellow man as
> your self. That is the minimum.
>
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

My thought has always been, if god created man in "his" own image, and
man is inherently sinful...


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:06 PM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> OrionWorks wrote:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> You have stated most succinctly that in order to be accepted in what
>>
>>>
>>> Believe, be baptized, follow the 10 commandments, love your fellow man
>>> as your self. That is the minimum.
>>>
>>> Another distinguished Vort member, Leak, has already responded with
>>> what Jesus had to say on this subject.
>>>
>>> As for my personal thoughts on the matter I would like to point out a
>>> few things you previously stated:
>>>
>>> A Holy G-d is obligated, because he is holy, to bring about
>>> the expiation of sin from the world. I'd love to do something
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps I misunderstood your use of the wording here because I find it
>> odd to claim G-d is "obligated" to do anything. If he/she is
>>
>
> It has to do with his nature, of which Kodeshim (holiness) is an integral
> part.  BTW, the Hebrew text makes it plain that G-d is a plurality of
> personages (see the three pillars of the Medatron in the Zohar) at least one
> of which is male. The Holy Spirit, OTOH, is female. Also consider this, what
> to you think would happen if the human race, in it's present sinful
> condition, got loose in the galaxy?
>
>> But that's really not what I want to discuss. You state: "... this
>> expiation will require blood shed, if I were to do that, I would be a
>> bigger murder than Joseph Stalin."
>>
>> Those are heavy words, Thomas. Such a statement causes me to wonder
>> how you are able to personally reconcile what is considered to be one
>>
>
> Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
>
>> of G-d's most important commandments, which you clearly state is,
>>
>> Nazis attempted to do to the Jews during
>> WWII? If this is a fairly accurate assumption on my part I find myself
>>
>
> Lucifer delights in producing counterfeits of G-d's plans. the Nazi's were
> honoring the gods that they worshiped, the pagan pantheon. As for innocent
> blood being required for the expiation of sin, explaining that is beyond my
> pay grade.
>
>> Is it because He is the
>> ultimate Boss, and what the Boss sez and wantz ...the Boss getz?
>>
>
> Rank has it's privileges. I see it in the light of a chemist doing what is
> necessary in order to make the reaction go in the desired way.
>
>> The way you seem to be describing G-d's mysterious ways, I can't help
>> but point out something obvious: What kind of example is G-d setting
>> for his beloved creations if it is so written that he so commands his
>>
>
> I'm assuming that Lucifer's rebellion was a necessary element in the plan.
> It seems that beings who have free will, can choose to follow Kodeshim or
> not. It's kind of like destructive testing under load. It appears that is
> the only way in which he can differentiate between the two.
>
>> perform the
>> necessary "...blood shed" himself - presumably to set things right in
>> this world.
>>
>
> On that note, let me mention Isaiah 63. Our eschatologists put that at end
> of the Tribulation, where Yeshua deals with a remnant of Edom which has
> survived the ordeal which has afflicted the rest of the world.
>
>
>> To me, such divine privilege does not come off as a perception of an
>> all-knowing, wise, and loving G-d.
>
> If he can tell which sentient, free willed entities will fail the test
> without testing, then G-d has gone to a lot of trouble for nothing. Also
> there is the matter of the Wheat and the Tares. Lucifer spread his seed into
> the same field. I assume that he had to be allowed to do so, since G-d was
> being fair with him.
>
>> Certainly NOT a Role Model to
>> emulate! Rather, it seems more to be the perception of egotistical
>> hypocrite known to have proclaimed: "BELIEVE IN ME And while you
>> are believing in me: Do as I say, not what I personally do."
>>
>
> You clearly don't understand Kodeshim. Ditto for the nature of the universe.
>
>> Jed, I ain't no atheist myself, but right now I do think I would
>> prefer the company of a gathering of atheists. Would you please put in
>> a good word for me? ;-)
>>
>
> The Council of the Ung-dly, Psalm 1, will take in anyone.
>
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

why would god create a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the
ability to tell the difference between, if evil did not yet exist?

Also, theres no good quote showing that satans fall DEFINATELY
happened after man was created, no?

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> My thought has always been, if god created man in "his" own image, and
>> man is inherently sinful...
>
> No, no, you don't have that right.
>
> God created the angels, the Nephilim, and the human race, but His track
> record, which is documented in the Bible along with various supporting
> documents, makes it clear that God just wasn't very good at this
> creation thing.
>
> In fact it's not at all clear that evil was in the world before humans
> were created, as I will explain:
>
> He/She/It/They started by creating the angels, or so it would appear, as
> far as we can tell from the fragments of time-lines we have on hand.
> Unfortunately God created the angels with the capacity for *envy*. By
> itself this is not evil, but there's a bad bit of alchemy which played
> on this capacity, which God certainly should have foreseen.  (As long as
> we're assuming God isn't evil, of course, we must assume God didn't
> foresee the mess this would produce...)
>
> To get the full story, see either the Testament of Moses or the Book of
> Adam and Eve. God made Adam, like, sub-lord over all, *despite* having
> made Adam "just a little lower than the angels".  One angel in
> particular was seriously galled by the fact that God had actually placed
> Adam *above* the angels in rank order, despite Adam's manifest
> inferiority vis a vis those angels.  That angel was, of course, Lucifer,
> and the worm of envy ate away at Lucifer and that is the source of (much
> of the) evil in the world.  Thus, we can see that, if Lucifer hadn't had
> the capacity for *envy*, the world would be in much better shape today.
>
> Now, I said God wasn't real great at this creation thing; it wasn't just
> this mess-up with Lucifer which leads to that conclusion.  Consider the
> Nephilim.  They were, as far as one can tell, an early experiment in
> creation and they went seriously wrong.  This is alluded to in Genesis,
> but to get the full scoop you really need to read the (misplaced) book
> of Enoch.  (I say "misplaced" because it was quite literally misplaced
> for quite a few centuries, and only found again relatively recently.
> Note well:  Enoch is quoted by Jude, so if we take the zero-error
> approach to the Bible we must include Enoch by reference, since Jude
> surely wouldn't have quoted Enoch if Enoch weren't also perfect ...
> right?  The fact that Enoch was never really lost supports this view,
> too, as all the "true books" must ultimately be indestructible, as a
> moment's reflection will surely convince you.)
>
> But it wasn't just the Nephilim -- in fact one can also blame the
> Nephilim on some rather wayward angels, according to at least one
> version of the story.  (But again, it appears that the angels in
> question were envious and covetous and that comes right back to the
> flawed angelic recipe God used to start with.)  There's something even
> worse buried here:  It took God multiple tries to get Adam's wife
> "right".  The first attempt, who was named Lilith, was just a walking
> disaster.  The second time around, when God created Eve, things went a
> lot better.
>
> Incidentally, if God used one of Adam's ribs to create Eve, then he may
> have done the same for Lilith, and this would explain why men have equal
> numbers of ribs on both sides -- obviously God took one from one side
> for Eve, and one from the other side for Lilith.  (So, which one was the
> left-winger?  Not sure...)
>
> Anyhow we have here a very sorry record of creationism.  Lucifer was
> obviously flawed from the get-go, the Nephilim were just a terrible
> mistake, and Lilith, who apparently got away rather than being wiped
> from the page of time, has caused who-knows-how much trouble over the
> millenia.
>
> Whatever, if the lot of you are going to pursue this silly subject, at
> least try to get the references right, and don't just *ignore* the ones
> you don't like.
>
> (BTW the Bible actually looks a lot more consistent if we (a) abandon
> the zero-error approach and (b) attempt to throw out all the obviously
> bogus books.  The New Testament, in particular, gets reduced to the book
> of Mark and a few Pauline letters, with relatively few inconsistencies
> and sillinesses and some reasonably good philosophical advice.)
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Im saying, especially with the power shown in names by god (Giving to
Adam the power to name all animals, and thus control them by their
name) ect, wouldn't creating a tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
and naming it as such, basically CREATE the concept of evil, if it did
not already exist?

I've not read those particular apocropha, i will have to look them up,
thank you.

As for Lillith, she appears in the Haggadda, which was basically a
cliff notes with annotation book that got started up in, I wanna say
5th or 6th century bc, but I could have the date wrong without looking
it up.   It included larger versions of and personal thoughts on the
Talmud on up through...  Either esther or ezra.  Again, my memories
fuzzy.  I really should just google it.

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=haggadda

there, that will take care of it.  heh.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> why would god create a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the
>> ability to tell the difference between, if evil did not yet exist?
>
> Hmmm, interesting question!  I'm glad you asked me that, young man!
>
> Next question, please!
>
> (Errr... Perhaps God's ability to foretell the future had already tipped
> him/her/it/them off that there was going to be trouble with Satan, who
> had already been created at that point...)
>
>>
>> Also, theres no good quote showing that satans fall DEFINATELY
>> happened after man was created, no?
>>
>
> Assuming that's a serious question, here's a serious answer...
>
> In the Bible there's essentially nothing on Satan's fall.  So, within
> the bible, the answer is a clear "no".
>
> However, the Bible comes from a tradition which included additional
> material, both oral and written.  The extrabiblical tradition regarding
> Satan's fall is, IIRC, written down in the Testament of Moses and the
> Story of Adam and Eve.  It's in those (pseudepigraphic and/or
> apocryphal) books that the tradition of Satan's fall due to envy of Adam
> is documented.  And I think it's pretty clear, in those books, that
> Satan's fall happened after the creation of Adam.
>
> The Nephilim are also a largely extra-biblical tradition.  IIRC, within
> the Bible, there's a vague reference to them in Genesis, and there's a
> hint that Goliath was sort of a "left over" Nephilim, but that's about
> it.  As I said, however, there's a lot more said about them in Enoch,
> which was once widely accepted as a holy book, before it was lost to
> Europe for several centuries.  Interestingly, Enoch survived as a
> well-known and almost-canonical book in Ethiopia.  All currently extant
> manuscripts of Enoch are in fact in Ethiopic, though the original book
> was written in Hebrew.
>
> And I have no idea where to find much of anything about Lilith.  She's
> far, far extra-biblical -- she's not mentioned in any of the
> pseudepigrapha which I've read.  (She makes an appearance in Valis, but
> I don't know anyone who considers that book "sacred".)
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT - "The Rapture"

[leaking pen]

Are you suggesting that the 4th planet is what happened the first time
Satan got uppity?

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:12 PM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> leaking pen wrote:
>
>> why would god create a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the
>> ability to tell the difference between, if evil did not yet exist?
>>
>
> Good question, I wonder what the Zohar has to say about it.
>
>> Also, theres no good quote showing that satans fall DEFINATELY
>> happened after man was created, no?
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence 
>> wrote:
>>
>
> There are some of us who believe that the world is old, millions, perhaps
> hundreds of millions of years old. Then there is the matter of the planet
> that might have been where the asteroids are today. IMHO, planets don't
> disintegrate, just the opposite. The late astrophysicist, Tom Van Flanderan
> authored a book on the exploding planet hypothesis.
>
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Thoughts on this and that

[leaking pen]

4. When you get down to it, no one owes anyone
anything. It all cancels out. You highminded geeks owe
the lowly greasemonkey and metal press operator just
as much as he owes you. So shut up.

preach on brother!  That opinion pisses me off a lot, Some of my
friends that were able to go to a REAL college while I was stuck in
community college had some serious ego issues about the lower classes.
 Sigh.

as for the religion, hey, its being kept to one ot thread at the
moment, and I find that when theres a single religion thread, it tends
to reduce the extra crap tossed on in other threads.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Kyle Mcallister
 wrote:
>
> Vortexians, left, right, center, up, down, backwards,
> sideways, snakebit, and/or whatever
> political/religious/etc. leanings you may have:
>
> A few points, directed in seemingly random directions
> at no one party (all seem equally guilty here), but
> maybe not so random?
>
> 1. Someone should go read the f---ing list rules
> again, about what Vortex-L is for. Where's VortexB-L
> when we need it?
> 2. Where's Bill?!?!
> 3. On 'pay the government well to do it for us'...
> yes, that's fine. But do so with a large caliber and
> large number of guns pointed at them, and tell them,
> don't screw up. You want my taxes, you spend them
> right.
> 4. When you get down to it, no one owes anyone
> anything. It all cancels out. You highminded geeks owe
> the lowly greasemonkey and metal press operator just
> as much as he owes you. So shut up.
> 5. Think 4 is wrong? Try and live without a mechanic,
> a truck route driver, a line stringer for the electric
> company, etc., for a few days. You can't telecommute
> everything.
> 6. In progressing from a Kardaschev type 0 to a type I
> civilization, energy expendature/generating capacity
> must increase. To hell with efficiency and
> conservation, let us make more, better, cleaner. Let's
> do it so well, that no one needs worry about turning
> the heat down.
> 7. Barack Obama is not a god, and he will screw up.
> Anyone would. Whether or not he makes good decisions
> in the long run, no one knows yet. I hope he does; I
> would be insane to hope he trashes the place. But we
> don't know, and he has already done a large number of
> stupid things, and made a lot of people mad. Before
> you liberals say anything, consider this: your side is
> the one that bitches about not hurting feelings. You
> love feelgood. So stuff a sock in it.
> 8. Republicans...now I turn to you. Why are so many of
> you HOPING Obama et al trash the place? Wouldn't it
> make sense to hope that, despite what it looks like so
> far, they do something that helps PEOPLE, and not
> highminders (on both sides) and stupid causes?
> 9. The stimulus bill (soeee!!! pigpigpig...)
> should have been spent on energy. And no one should
> disagree with it. If you do, then you lie in what you
> post to this list.
> 10. I do not give a damn about polar bears. I could
> care less if they all die off. I would gladly kill
> every single one of them to save a single human life,
> and that includes everyone on this list, even those I
> totally disagree with, with no exceptions. Human life
> is something meaningful, and it is more important. If
> you don't agree, I don't care.
> 11. You on the religious right. You are guilty FAR
> more than many others. You claim to speak from God's
> perspective. May he hold you to that one day when you
> face him. You say (not pointing fingers, almost all
> Christians say this) that works are filthy rags before
> the Lord. Have you ever read a book called James?
> Faith alone without works is /dead/.
> 12. I am not done with you. Let's sit around and wait
> for judgement, because there's nothing we can do about
> it. The human race is more valuable than that. And you
> know what? It forbids such actions in...oh...that book
> called the 'Bible.' Maybe some Christians have heard
> of it? You are supposed to be prepared, in CASE the
> 'day' comes, but live as if it weren't for a thousand
> years. That's pretty damned ironclad. And from what I
> can tell, that means, get off your lazy asses and MAKE
> A DIFFERENCE.
> 13. Yes...laziness. It is very pervasive these days,
> ain't it? Christians seem to be among the lazy,
> liberals, conservatives, and so on. Hell, I can't
> really find a boundary. What group isn't lazy? Oh,
> right, very few individuals are. Talk is cheap. Go do
> something.
> 14. Worshipping Godman Obama will get you about as
> much result as worshipping anything else, in my
> experience: not a whole lot.
> 15. I am...spiritual. I am /sort of/ Christian. But
> oddly enough, I find better company these days with
> agnostics. They remember how to ask some questions. To
> be honest, I don't know what I believe, but I know
> this: God means, GO DO GOOD. The Christian church
> should learn this.
> 16. Freedom should never be exchanged for increased
> safety. Else, what's a life for? Or are you one of
> those people who thinks lif

Re: [Vo]:Organic farming under threat...

[leaking pen]

This is becuase the "organic"  old school sprays that most organic
farms use are actually MORE toxic.  Most modern bug and fungus sprays
are designed to break down quickly and NOT poison groundwater.  Where
as the old "organics"  One of the common fungicides is copper
acetate or sulfate.  Which breaks down, and causes copper poisoning of
the soil.   Organic right now is actually WORSE for the environment.

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:23 PM, John Berry  wrote:
> Organic and Small Farmers and Ranchers; Natural Food Products Farmers Under
> Attack...
> The Obama administration is pushing farm controls through Congress as fast
> as possible and has coordinated the bills so there will be no debate and the
> committee meetings
>  ole-090214-935.html> are closed. There are less than two weeks to stop the
> farming bills, H.R. 875 and S. 425. could put organic farms out of
> business. The group Democracy in action writes that the new "food safety"
> bills before in Congress were written and sponsored by big agri companies
> like Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, and ADM. The USDA would be given the power
> to force organic farmers what to feed their animals, how to medically
> "treat" them and what toxic "sprays" to use. There would be penalties
> beyond the ability of most small farmers to pay. There are buried
> regulations in the bills which criminalize all aspects of farming by listing
> them as "sources of seed contamination". Farmers would be forced to use
> only approved seeds. They could be forced to give up a good seed cleaner
> and put in a building and equipment for a million and half dollars. These
> bills are set to industrialize all farms and force farmers to buy chemicals
> and drugs and face $500,000 penalties if they refuse. More
>  http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26
> 714
>  6714&t> &t
> Farmers Under Attack...
> This urgent message is from our correspondent, Linn Cohen-Cole on February
> 17, 2009:
> We have less than two weeks to stop the take over the farms and ranches.
> H.R. 875 and S. 425
> We need to rally people immediately.
> The new administration is pushing new farm controls through Congress as fast
> as possible and have coordinated the bills so there will be no debate and
> the committee meetings are closed.
> Transparency, change, undoing Bush's regulations, giving the public time to
> comment, grassroots anything? Our entire food system and thus our health is
> being decided without the public knowing and those who do know have zero
> access and the media is absent and they are moving at warp speed to sew this
> up.
> Would you put these out, in this order, showing the article as you do so
> people are more likely to read it? They are imperfect but the closest I've
> come to explaining how the game is going to be played. No direct, frontal
> assault on organic farming but an insidious process of "infecting" organic
> farming...
> Example: imagine Joel Salatin's wonderful organic farm under the direction
> of the USDA, with detailed instructions on what he must feed and when, how
> he must medically "treat" his animals and with what, what he must "spray"
> and when, ... you get the picture. These bills will industrialize all farms
> and insure the farmers are forced to buy chemicals and drugs. Organic is
> dead. As well as human control over the food supply. As well as health.
> Schoolmarm approach to punishing farmers out of farming.
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/Monsanto-and-the-Schoolmar-by-Linn-Cohen-Co
> le-090214-935.html
> Bills being rushed through Congress, set to destroy organic farming.
>  http://www.opednews.com/articles/Monsanto-bills-being-rushe-by-Linn-Cohen-Co
> le-090217-758.html
> Linn Cohen-Cole is a dedicated researcher and "Paul Revere" of health
> freedom. At her urging, we've set up an Action Item for you to send an
> unmistakable message to your representatives in the Senate and the House. We
> must educate Congress that you do not want organic and small farmers
> regulated out of existence. You do not want "Big Agra" regulations, perhaps
> necessary to protect the public when dealing with large scale agra business,
> applied to organic and small family farms and ranches or to natural and
> organic food products, including Dietary Supplements.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zP2teJMuCs
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> ATTENTION PLEASE:
> The Symphonic Health List is for educational purpose only; learning
> different health and healing modalities and exchanging opinions and
> experiences, and not to give medical advice. It may be news related, purely

Re: [Vo]:Organic farming under threat...

[leaking pen]

Copper sulfate and other copper salts are pretty much the ONLY
fungicides used by organic farming.  The sprays used today by
conventional farming are NOT the poisonous , groundwater polluting,
wildlife killing soups they were 20 years ago.  We figured out that
certain things were bad, and then stopped using them.  But organic
farming gets a lot of breaks on proving things are safe.

what these bills ACTUALLY do is create accountability, require that
what methods a farm use are collected, and that data given to the
government, and that things are properly labeled.  It gives the
government branch that is created the right to say, this process is
NOT safe, here is the science saying it is not safe, STOP IT.  And it
allows better tracking of where food comes from.  So that when things
DO go wrong, like say, the tomato listeria issue, or the tomato e coli
issue, or the spinach and lettuce e coli issue, or the peanut butter
salmonella issue, from the past couple years (ALL of which were, shock
and surprise , ORGANIC foods with bacteria issues).

Ohh, and it will make it easier to prevent things like when the
genetically modified corn that wasn't approved for human consumption
ended up in taco bell taco shells.  Of course, that corn was modified
to naturally produce more BT, that people screamed about becuase it
can cause issues such as breakdowns and stoppages in the human gut.
And which is the same chemical that is the main organic farm spray
used as a pesticide.  Interesting.  Thankfully, it breaks down quickly
in direct sunlight, or with cooking, or with a few seconds of uv
radiation.  So the corn that made it into the shells, since it had
been irradiated then cooked, was harmless.

But... whoops.  If used on lettuce, it can get down into the nooks and
crannys between leaves, survive the sunlight in that matter, and since
any uv irradiation at all means you cant market it as organic, it
doesn't get irradiated.  Hope you wash your lettuce REALLY REALLY
WELL!

(For note, my specialty is biochemistry, I am VERY concerned about the
goings on of such places as Monsanto (spits on the ground) and grow a
lot of my own food as a backyard gardener. But unfortunately, a lot of
really UNSAFE practices got okayed for the organic label, and lot of
neccesary safe practices screamed down by people who didn't understand
the science of it, and at this point, the organic label on food COULD
be good, but is often not. )

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 5:21 PM, John Berry  wrote:
> Um, I don't know for sure but I don't think that the certified organic
> produce used the sprays you are talking about, certainly I know that it has
> a far lower level of toxicity in the produce and beter levels of vitamins,
> phytonutrients and minerals.
>
> If certified organic in the US is so poorly regulated to include such sprays
> then that's another issues, not the case here. (NZ)
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM, leaking pen  wrote:
>>
>> This is becuase the "organic"  old school sprays that most organic
>> farms use are actually MORE toxic.  Most modern bug and fungus sprays
>> are designed to break down quickly and NOT poison groundwater.  Where
>> as the old "organics"  One of the common fungicides is copper
>> acetate or sulfate.  Which breaks down, and causes copper poisoning of
>> the soil.   Organic right now is actually WORSE for the environment.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:23 PM, John Berry  wrote:
>> > Organic and Small Farmers and Ranchers; Natural Food Products Farmers
>> > Under
>> > Attack...
>> > The Obama administration is pushing farm controls through Congress as
>> > fast
>> > as possible and has coordinated the bills so there will be no debate and
>> > the
>> > committee meetings
>> >
>> > <http://www.opednews.com/articles/Monsanto-and-the-Schoolmar-by-Linn-Cohen-C
>> > ole-090214-935.html> are closed. There are less than two weeks to stop
>> > the
>> > farming bills, H.R. 875 and S. 425. could put organic farms out of
>> > business. The group Democracy in action writes that the new "food
>> > safety"
>> > bills before in Congress were written and sponsored by big agri
>> > companies
>> > like Monsanto, Cargill, Tysons, and ADM. The USDA would be given the
>> > power
>> > to force organic farmers what to feed their animals, how to medically
>> > "treat" them and what toxic "sprays" to use. There would be penalties
>> > beyond the ability of most small farmers to pay. There are buried
>> > regulations in the bills which criminalize all aspects of farming by
>> > listing
>> > them as "sources of seed contamination". Farmers woul

Re: [Vo]:Organic farming under threat...

[leaking pen]

In other words you have a gut instinct that I'm wrong, I mean, organic
HAS to be better, right?  Just look at the name.  But you have no clue
in what way I'm wrong, and you'd rather not do the research and
shatter your world view.  Sigh.  Just like all the anti alt sci types.
 This is a SCIENCE forum.

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:16 PM, John Berry  wrote:
> You have some quite unbalanced points in there but I don't have the will or
> time to argue.
>
> What I can say is that the contamination issues you mention have much
> misinfo around them.
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, leaking pen  wrote:
>>
>> Copper sulfate and other copper salts are pretty much the ONLY
>> fungicides used by organic farming.  The sprays used today by
>> conventional farming are NOT the poisonous , groundwater polluting,
>> wildlife killing soups they were 20 years ago.  We figured out that
>> certain things were bad, and then stopped using them.  But organic
>> farming gets a lot of breaks on proving things are safe.
>>
>> what these bills ACTUALLY do is create accountability, require that
>> what methods a farm use are collected, and that data given to the
>> government, and that things are properly labeled.  It gives the
>> government branch that is created the right to say, this process is
>> NOT safe, here is the science saying it is not safe, STOP IT.  And it
>> allows better tracking of where food comes from.  So that when things
>> DO go wrong, like say, the tomato listeria issue, or the tomato e coli
>> issue, or the spinach and lettuce e coli issue, or the peanut butter
>> salmonella issue, from the past couple years (ALL of which were, shock
>> and surprise , ORGANIC foods with bacteria issues).
>>
>> Ohh, and it will make it easier to prevent things like when the
>> genetically modified corn that wasn't approved for human consumption
>> ended up in taco bell taco shells.  Of course, that corn was modified
>> to naturally produce more BT, that people screamed about becuase it
>> can cause issues such as breakdowns and stoppages in the human gut.
>> And which is the same chemical that is the main organic farm spray
>> used as a pesticide.  Interesting.  Thankfully, it breaks down quickly
>> in direct sunlight, or with cooking, or with a few seconds of uv
>> radiation.  So the corn that made it into the shells, since it had
>> been irradiated then cooked, was harmless.
>>
>> But... whoops.  If used on lettuce, it can get down into the nooks and
>> crannys between leaves, survive the sunlight in that matter, and since
>> any uv irradiation at all means you cant market it as organic, it
>> doesn't get irradiated.  Hope you wash your lettuce REALLY REALLY
>> WELL!
>>
>> (For note, my specialty is biochemistry, I am VERY concerned about the
>> goings on of such places as Monsanto (spits on the ground) and grow a
>> lot of my own food as a backyard gardener. But unfortunately, a lot of
>> really UNSAFE practices got okayed for the organic label, and lot of
>> neccesary safe practices screamed down by people who didn't understand
>> the science of it, and at this point, the organic label on food COULD
>> be good, but is often not. )
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 5:21 PM, John Berry  wrote:
>> > Um, I don't know for sure but I don't think that the certified organic
>> > produce used the sprays you are talking about, certainly I know that it
>> > has
>> > a far lower level of toxicity in the produce and beter levels of
>> > vitamins,
>> > phytonutrients and minerals.
>> >
>> > If certified organic in the US is so poorly regulated to include such
>> > sprays
>> > then that's another issues, not the case here. (NZ)
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM, leaking pen  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This is becuase the "organic"  old school sprays that most organic
>> >> farms use are actually MORE toxic.  Most modern bug and fungus sprays
>> >> are designed to break down quickly and NOT poison groundwater.  Where
>> >> as the old "organics"  One of the common fungicides is copper
>> >> acetate or sulfate.  Which breaks down, and causes copper poisoning of
>> >> the soil.   Organic right now is actually WORSE for the environment.
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:23 PM, John Berry  wrote:
>> >> > Organic and Small Farmers and Ranchers; Natural Food Products Farmers
>> >> > Under
>> >> > Attack...
>> >> > The O

Re: [Vo]:Organic farming under threat...

[leaking pen]

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/sep/06/health/he-organic6?s=o&n=o&rd=www.consumerfreedom.com&sessid=48b8477102f0851fe27cee152b2fcdd1f9c1f6d0&pg=4&pgtp=article&eagi=&page_type=article&exci=2004_09_06_health_he-organic6

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/the-great-organic-myths-why-organic-foods-are-an-indulgence-the-world-cant-afford-818585.html

the difference in vitamins is generally on the order of less than a
percentage of difference from every unbiased, well documented study
i've seen.

And again, you are miscategorizing conventional farming by calling it
a chemical soup.  Are there particular farms that perhaps spray too
much and too often and with more things than they should?  Sure, you
get that kind of behaviour in any industry.  But this law you are
bitching about, guess what?  Will help reduce and eliminate that.

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:16 PM, John Berry  wrote:
> No, I know that it is better, and know know that much of what you say is
> flawed but I don't see the point in arguing it with you.
>
> Organic food has higher levels of vitamins and phytonutrients, is lacks the
> chemical soup that is used by conventionally grown produce and various other
> advantages.
>
> I have done research into organics but not on what they use in different
> areas to protect the produce and at some point I might look that up though I
> don't have the time right now.
>
> If you are ignoring the benefits of organically grown produce then tyou are
> making a mistake but it's one I don't have anymore time to correct right
> now.
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:31 PM, leaking pen  wrote:
>>
>> In other words you have a gut instinct that I'm wrong, I mean, organic
>> HAS to be better, right?  Just look at the name.  But you have no clue
>> in what way I'm wrong, and you'd rather not do the research and
>> shatter your world view.  Sigh.  Just like all the anti alt sci types.
>>  This is a SCIENCE forum.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:16 PM, John Berry  wrote:
>> > You have some quite unbalanced points in there but I don't have the will
>> > or
>> > time to argue.
>> >
>> > What I can say is that the contamination issues you mention have much
>> > misinfo around them.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, leaking pen  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Copper sulfate and other copper salts are pretty much the ONLY
>> >> fungicides used by organic farming.  The sprays used today by
>> >> conventional farming are NOT the poisonous , groundwater polluting,
>> >> wildlife killing soups they were 20 years ago.  We figured out that
>> >> certain things were bad, and then stopped using them.  But organic
>> >> farming gets a lot of breaks on proving things are safe.
>> >>
>> >> what these bills ACTUALLY do is create accountability, require that
>> >> what methods a farm use are collected, and that data given to the
>> >> government, and that things are properly labeled.  It gives the
>> >> government branch that is created the right to say, this process is
>> >> NOT safe, here is the science saying it is not safe, STOP IT.  And it
>> >> allows better tracking of where food comes from.  So that when things
>> >> DO go wrong, like say, the tomato listeria issue, or the tomato e coli
>> >> issue, or the spinach and lettuce e coli issue, or the peanut butter
>> >> salmonella issue, from the past couple years (ALL of which were, shock
>> >> and surprise , ORGANIC foods with bacteria issues).
>> >>
>> >> Ohh, and it will make it easier to prevent things like when the
>> >> genetically modified corn that wasn't approved for human consumption
>> >> ended up in taco bell taco shells.  Of course, that corn was modified
>> >> to naturally produce more BT, that people screamed about becuase it
>> >> can cause issues such as breakdowns and stoppages in the human gut.
>> >> And which is the same chemical that is the main organic farm spray
>> >> used as a pesticide.  Interesting.  Thankfully, it breaks down quickly
>> >> in direct sunlight, or with cooking, or with a few seconds of uv
>> >> radiation.  So the corn that made it into the shells, since it had
>> >> been irradiated then cooked, was harmless.
>> >>
>> >> But... whoops.  If used on lettuce, it can get down into the nooks and
>> >> crannys between leaves, survive the sunlight in that matter, and since
>> >> any uv irradiation at all me

Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold

[leaking pen]

More importantly, winters are getting colder, from more open water and
less ice, causing more reflection back, and summers hotter, melting
the ice, repeating the cycle.

look at summer data, and winter data.  hotter in summer, colder in
winter, than previous.  This is why its called global climate change.
its not JUST warming...

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> thomas malloy wrote:
>
>>> You do realize, I hope, that this has no bearing whatever on the validity
>>> of global warming observations.
>>
>> You do realize, I hope, that this has been an ongoing pattern this year.
>
> An ongoing pattern where? In your state? In North America? This is not the
> worldwide trend. Temperatures in Japan and Europe, for example, remain at
> record highs this year.
>
> Also, trends that last only one year do not count. You have to look for
> broader, longer trends. There have been several cold years in the last few
> decades, but there have been many more hot years and the average is higher
> than previous norms.
>
> Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature extremes
> including colder than normal temperatures in winter.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold

[leaking pen]

I have a spelling chequer.
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.

Eye ran this poem threw it,
Your sure reel glad two no.
Its vary polished inn it's weigh.
My checker tolled me sew.

A checker is a bless sing,
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.

Each frays come posed up on my screen
Eye trussed too bee a joule.
The checker pours o'er every word
To cheque sum spelling rule.

Bee fore a veiling checkers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if we're lacks oar have a laps,
We wood bee maid too wine.

Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
Their are know faults with in my cite,
Of nun eye am a wear.

Now spelling does knot phase me,
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.

To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should bee proud,
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.

Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft wear four pea seas,
And why eye brake in two averse
Buy righting want too pleas

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:14 PM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> Jed sez:
>
>> OrionWorks wrote:
>>
>>> This is obviously a sad, sad story where everyone looses.
>>
>> loses
>>
>> He looses his fateful sword, and she loses her head.
>>
>> (Sorry to make a joke a dreadful situation but it is a good mnemonic device
>> which we sure need with English spelling.)
>>
>> - Jed
>
> Once again, caught red-handed falling on the swerd of my spiel checker.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold

[leaking pen]

Umm, my name isnt steven

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 5:30 PM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> thomas malloy wrote:
>>
 Finally, I believe global warming is thought to produce temperature
 extremes including colder than normal temperatures in winter.
>>>
>>> That's why they call it Climate Change, it covers them either way.
>>
>> It only covers them if the climate is, in fact, changing. It has to change
>> in either direction, or in both directions in different seasons. If the
>> average for winter is no colder than it was 50 or 100 years ago, and summer
>> is no warmer, that means they are wrong. The test they face is just as
>> rigorous and easy to verify as it would be if the change is only in one
>> direction, so they are not "covered" in any sense.
>>
> That was brilliant Jed. I laughed more at it, than I did at Steven's silly
> poem.
>
>>
>>> According to Christopher Horner, the AGW advocates have doctored the data
>>> to support the warning hypothesis, you OTOH, contend that the warming effect
>>> is real . . .
>>
>> Naturally I am assuming that they did not doctor the data. If they did,
>> then the effect is not real.
>
> How open minded of you Jed. I may just have to procure a copy of Horner's
> book just to ascertain the veracity of his claims.
>
>>
>> However, as I said before, I think it is extremely unlikely that they
>> doctored the data and yet none of the conspirators has revealed that fact.
>
> But it has been revealed, Horner's book is but one,of several which make the
> aforementioned claim.
>
>> Tens of thousands of people would have to be in on the conspiracy and I
>> think it is impossible for so many people to keep a secret.
>
> If the Horner, et al, are correct, there are a few well placed people
> beating the drum, and a lot of other people cowered into silence.
>
>> From what I know of human nature I suppose the likelihood of this is zero
>> to 8 or 10 decimal places. I am surprised that you or anyone else takes this
>> hypothesis seriously.
>
> IMHO, the truth is right in front of you.
>
>>
>> If there were only a few dozen people involved in the conspiracy, then it
>> would be plausible that the data has been diddled with.
>
> Unless we're right of course, and it's a conspiracy of tens of thousands,
> done in plain sight.
>
> See my next post
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: [Vo]:I told you it was cold

[leaking pen]

Absolutely.  I find it best to shop local produce, and theres a big
difference between green farms and "organic" ones sometimes.  There
are a lot of alternative labeling systems in place, hopefully a few
with a methodology that makes more sense than the organic label become
more mainstream.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> Umm, my name isnt steven
>
> Ahh, there are so many stevens, stephens, steves, and whatnot in this
> group that nobody can keep them straight anymore, and I'm not surprised
> that thomas gets confused and thinks everything's coming from some
> steph/ven or other
>
> I even sometimes find myself paging back to the top of a post from some
> "Stephen" or other to check the "from:" field and find out whether or
> not I'm the one who wrote it.
>
> BTW I appreciated the collection of homonymal errors;  tx.
>
> And the info on organic pesticides, ditto (tho for different reasons --
> it wasn't exactly amusing).  I've gotta do a little more research on
> that one; we eat a lot of green organic stuff here, so if some of the
> "green" on the leaves is from, say, "Paris", we really want to know.
>
>

[Vo]:oddly appropriate comic for this group

[leaking pen]

http://cowbirdsinlove.com/comics/46/engineer.png

Re: [Vo]:Off topic biological problem

[leaking pen]

You can adjust it yourself, and there are hot water bacteria that will
also grow, which is why its wiser to heat cold tap water than to use
hot water from teh taop for drinking and such.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:19 AM,   wrote:
> My water tank broke about 3 months ago.  A new one was put in.  After that I
> noticed what appeared to be bite marks on my legs.  Some nights I got 20 or
> more bites. I thought that bugs came into the apartment while the tank was
> being installed.  Maybe they left the door open. Maybe bed bugs from the
> next apartment.  Yes, thay can live in an upscale neighborhood.  Maybe there
> were bugs in my car or office.  I cleaned vacuumed, put out sticky traps,
> slept on a sticky tape enclosed rubber batter, spread diatomaceous earth
> around, washed my clothes in bleach and ruined them, put dubble sided sticky
> tape in a square on the cealing above my bed, and had the exterminator come
> in.  He sprayed the apartment with Stera Fab.  The problem persisted.  I
> searched and found  no bugs except for a few ear wigs.  I even got up at
> night with a bright flashlight and looked for them.  I was tormented. Upon
> the advice of Ron Anderson, I had the temperature turned up on my hot water
> tank.  The results were immediate.  The bite marks went away.  Apparently in
> the combination hot water / heating tanks bacteria can grow if the
> temperature is set to low.  Iron from the failure of the last tank my have
> contributed to the problem.  Maybe there is something going on in Lake
> Norman.  I am now happy again.  The water is a bit hot but I’ll leave it go
> for now.  I hope the new tank does not overheat and I will go through the
> same thing again.   If I could open the utility door I could adjust the
> thing myself.  What next?  Dont turn down your tank too much.
>
> Frank Znidarsic
>
> 
> The Average US Credit Score is 692. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!

Re: [Vo]:the hell is this? __"We're talking about a new field of science that's a hybrid between chemistry and physics."__

[leaking pen]

"To our knowledge, this is the first scientific report of the
production of highly energetic neutrons from a LENR device," added the
study's co-author in a statement.

Really?  REALLY really?

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
> http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a67cf72fe27770f9ec992da18169937d.a1&show_article=1
> Scientists in possible cold fusion breakthrough
> Mar 24 11:49 AM US/Eastern
> Researchers at a US Navy laboratory have unveiled what they say is
> "significant" evidence of cold fusion, a potential energy source that
> has many skeptics in the scientific community.
>
> The scientists on Monday described what they called the first clear
> visual evidence that low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR), or cold
> fusion devices can produce neutrons, subatomic particles that
> scientists say are indicative of nuclear reactions.
>  "Our finding is very significant," said analytical chemist Pamela
> Mosier-Boss of the US Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center
> (SPAWAR) in San Diego, California.
>
> "To our knowledge, this is the first scientific report of the
> production of highly energetic neutrons from a LENR device," added the
> study's co-author in a statement.
>
> The study's results were presented at the annual meeting of the
> American Chemical Society in Salt Lake City, Utah.
>
> The city is also the site of an infamous presentation on cold fusion
> 20 years ago by Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons that sent
> shockwaves across the world.
>
> Despite their claim to cold fusion discovery, the Fleishmann-Pons
> study soon fell into discredit after other researchers were unable to
> reproduce the results.
>
> Scientists have been working for years to produce cold fusion
> reactions, a potentially cheap, limitless and environmentally-clean
> source of energy.
>
> Paul Padley, a physicist at Rice University who reviewed Mosier-Boss's
> published work, said the study did not provide a plausible explanation
> of how cold fusion could take place in the conditions described.
>
> "It fails to provide a theoretical rationale to explain how fusion
> could occur at room temperatures. And in its analysis, the research
> paper fails to exclude other sources for the production of neutrons,"
> he told the Houston Chronicle.
>
> "The whole point of fusion is, you?re bringing things of like charge
> together. As we all know, like things repel, and you have to overcome
> that repulsion somehow."
>
> But Steven Krivit, editor of the New Energy Times, said the study was
> "big" and could open a new scientific field.
>
> The neutrons produced in the experiments "may not be caused by fusion
> but perhaps some new, unknown nuclear process," added Krivit, who has
> monitored cold fusion studies for the past 20 years.
>
> __"We're talking about a new field of science that's a hybrid between
> chemistry and physics."__
>
>
> Copyright AFP 2008, AFP stories and photos shall not be published,
> broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed
> directly or indirectly in any medium
>
> --
> --
> a hundred million dollar gamble into alternative energy research in
> the form of stipends and donations from the worldwide population
> could completely alter the face of the planet.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT: exploding cordless vacuum cleaner

[leaking pen]

Static buildup, ignition of dust.  I've heard of several cases where
the static buildup from the cyclone style canister vacs spark and
ignite some of the deodorizing powders that have become popular.   I
got good 5 inch arcs off a vacuum once, so I can believe it.

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
> LENR?
> Harry
>
> Electrolux vacuum explodes, causing third-degree burns
>
> Last Updated: Friday, March 27, 2009 | 10:19 AM ET
> Comments44Recommend29
> CBC News
>
> A woman is recovering from third-degree burns to her left palm after
> the cordless vacuum she was using to clean the stairs in her Richmond,
> B.C., home exploded in her hands earlier this week...
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/03/26/bc-vacuum-burns-
> electrolux.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT: exploding cordless vacuum cleaner

[leaking pen]

Darn.  so much for my exploding static vortex dust cyclone idea.

damn you and your logic!

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
> Jones wrote:
>
>> Since it was a cordless, there was likely a lithium battery.
>>
>> These batteries have a history of overheating and explosion.
>
>
>
> Mark S Bilk wrote:
>> Downloading and magnifying the upper photo appears to show that
>> the top visible cell of the battery (still mostly inside the
>> handle) had burst, blowing a hole in the handle.  Those cells
>> are pretty small, and if they can power the motor for a while
>> they must contain a substantial amount of chemical energy.  An
>> internal short in the cell would rapidly convert all of that
>> energy to heat, turning the electrolyte into very hot, high
>> pressure vapor.  If the cell didn't have an overpressure release
>> diaphragm, its metal case would burst like a pipe bomb.
>
> A lithium battery letting go makes more sense to me than a dust
> explosion in the canister.
>
> I would have expected a dust explosion to produce cuts and bruises, but
> not a third degree burn on the hand.  A bursting battery right next to
> the operator's hand, on the other hand, seems much more likely to cause
> that kind of injury.
>
> An extremely brief exposure to burning gas, as in an explosion in the
> dust canister, would seem very unlikely to burn through the skin of the
> palm which was probably pressed against the handle at the time, which
> would in fact likely afford it a certain amount of protection from an
> explosion 8" or 10" away.
>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:51:34AM -0700, leaking pen wrote:
>>> Static buildup, ignition of dust.  I've heard of several cases where
>>> the static buildup from the cyclone style canister vacs spark and
>>> ignite some of the deodorizing powders that have become popular.   I
>>> got good 5 inch arcs off a vacuum once, so I can believe it.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>>>> LENR?
>>>> Harry
>>>>
>>>> Electrolux vacuum explodes, causing third-degree burns
>>>>
>>>> Last Updated: Friday, March 27, 2009 | 10:19 AM ET
>>>> Comments44Recommend29
>>>> CBC News
>>>>
>>>> A woman is recovering from third-degree burns to her left palm after
>>>> the cordless vacuum she was using to clean the stairs in her Richmond,
>>>> B.C., home exploded in her hands earlier this week...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/03/26/bc-vacuum-burns-
>>>> electrolux.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OT: exploding cordless vacuum cleaner

[leaking pen]

all i can plead is that my work internet filters prevent me from
seeing the picture, and i skimmed the article.

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:44 PM,   wrote:
> In reply to  leaking pen's message of Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:36:58 -0700:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>>Darn.  so much for my exploding static vortex dust cyclone idea.
>>
>>damn you and your logic!
>>
> Note also that the casing that holds the batteries has been blown away. This 
> is
> clearly due to an explosion from within.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Crazy?

[leaking pen]

Being a young American citizen is a crime now, I
suppose.

Where have you been?  Being a kid has involved a significant lack of
the normal human rights you normally get the moment you turn 18 for a
LONG while now.

and, this has been in the works for FOREVER.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 7:29 AM, Kyle Mcallister
 wrote:
>
> V,
>
> Since there's apparently little to no interest in
> learning what I found re: the Morton effect, or what
> I've done/am doing with Laithwaite's inertial
> propulsion work, or discussing faster than light
> travel, implications thereof (resistance to in
> sci-community/effects and/or testability of
> alternatives to SR/evidence supporting/etc.),
> constructing a simple LENR heater (still I maintain,
> we should try), and so forth, here's a bone to chew
> on. I tried getting away from this, but I felt that
> since the experiment has apparently died, maybe
> something else is wanted.
>
> You called me crazy when I said, Obama and Co. would
> salivate over the idea of forcing mandatory service on
> people. Read this, particularly section 6:
>
> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1444
>
> Look up HR 1388 on there as well.
>
> And this:
>
> http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/03/27/the-house-giveth-and-the-government-taketh-away-our-freedoms-1.php
>
> Ignore the somewhat ridiculous at times right-wing
> banners and whatnot, but the meat is all there to
> read, and you can find it from the horse's own mouth.
> Or is that donkey, given the political asses behind
> this?
>
> Allow me to quote this little thing called the 13th
> Amendment. It isn't just for blacks.
>
> "Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,
> except as a punishment for crime where of the party
> shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the
> United States, or any place subject to their
> jurisdiction.
>
> Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce
> this article by appropriate legislation."
>
> Being a young American citizen is a crime now, I
> suppose. And pray tell, if as HR1444 states,
> volunteerism is up, why do we need to even consider
> making it mandatory (which is unconstitutional and
> illegal)? Creedence Clearwater Revival got it right:
> "And when you ask them, how much should we give? Oooh,
> they only answer more! More! More!"
>
> I will qualify what I am saying for you that say, 'he
> posts this only out of concern for himself.' Wrong. I
> am not age eligible for this as proposed, nor would I
> be required due to my (numerous and increasing) health
> problems. I am worrying for my family, my friends, my
> acquaintances, my neighbors, and those I do not even
> know.
>
> Last note for now, what would the bleeding hearts
> (weren't you guys the same ones supposedly against
> drafts and such? Peace, flowers, etc.?) say if this
> had been proposed by a Republican? The only news
> outlet that /wouldn't/ be trashing it in that case
> would be Fux. Er... Fox. Sorry. Ahem.
>
> They'd be right to trash it too. Regardless of party
> line, this is wrong.
>
> --Kyle
> V for...Victory?
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Crazy?

[leaking pen]

Indeed, there has been discussion of a draft like thing that involves
either civil service, military service, or college.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Kyle Mcallister
 wrote:
>
>
> --- leaking pen  wrote:
>
>> Being a young American citizen is a crime now, I
>> suppose.
>>
>> Where have you been?  Being a kid has involved a
>> significant lack of
>> the normal human rights you normally get the moment
>> you turn 18 for a
>> LONG while now.
>
> Well, I was mostly referring to the age bracket
> targetted by these people, 18-25.
>
>> and, this has been in the works for FOREVER.
>
> I don't doubt it.
>
> --Kyle
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Crazy?

[leaking pen]

Americans need to get in line, toe the line, keep quiet, and obey orders.

Ohh no no no.  No we don't.  But being forced to think of other
people, and a bit of self discipline would be a good thing.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Rhong Dhong  wrote:
>
> I don't know why people are getting worked up about O's national service 
> proposal: plenty of countries have or have had that. The US had a draft from 
> 1940 to around 1972 and it didn't destroy liberty.
>
> Americans need to get in line, toe the line, keep quiet, and obey orders. 
> That sort of discipline would do wonders for them.
>
> O's proposal is a step in the right direction.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:crazy

[leaking pen]

Wow.

Guys, put the pipes down.  Stop the bubbles.  Your dealers cut it with
some REALLY nasty crap.

On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM, J. Klum  wrote:
> Rhong Dhong wrote:
>
> Kyle McAllister Writes:
>
> +++
> Excuse me. I am in line. I do the best I can... I /TOW/ the line. I pay my
> taxes...I help people...I give ...We bought...and gave it...I drive...barely
> make ends meet, and yet I gave...
> fuck you...Take your "discipline,"...shove it...
> +++
>
> You sound like a fine fellow, a disciplined humanitarian; but you have a bad
> attitude and are making it easy for undisciplined louts to whine about a
> little national service.
>
>
>
> O's proposal is a step in the right direction.
>
>
> +++
> No it is not. You should read a bit about pre-WWII
> Germany.
> +++
>
> I assume you are talking about the HitlerJugend. Boy scouts from what I
> hear. Got the kids into clean country air, got them to clear brush, live in
> tents, take responsibility.
>
> Just what O wants to do.
>
> Stop being part of the problem and start being part of the solution.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Funny Fellow Indeed and an all American Name to go with it!
>
> Kyle!
>
> We all know what is needed and that is to stock the Larder, Stock Pile the
> Ammo and Block all Entrances. Much to "THERE" future surprise we do indeed
> outnumber and will in the end prevail.
>
> Risking being placed on one of their lists of (no gooders, ala real
> Americans) give it up and do the right thing in the background, history
> prevails that surprise bests advance notice.
>
> I stand by you 100% even in the collapsed state of Washington my lawn will
> flow with fee loaders an thieves when the day of judgment comes.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Yeast powered fuel cell feeds on human blood

[leaking pen]

well, its not the yeasts waste thats the problem.  the human body will
deal with dead yeast, alcohol, ketones, and co2 with ease.

Its getting the waste out of the fuel cell, and leaving everything else in.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Really. See:
>
> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16882-yeastpowered-fuel-cell-feeds-on-human-blood.html
>
> It produces ~40 nanowatts which is enough for things like pacemakers.
>
> This is actually a good idea. If the device lasts for a long time it will
> have all of the advantages of a low power implanted cold fusion device. For
> high power applications such as heart pumps (VAD) and prosthetic arms, a
> cold fusion device would probably be better. Although, come to think of it,
> chemical fuel in the body powers natural heart tissue so that should be
> enough to power a mechanical heart pump.
>
> They have not solved the problem of removing the yeast's waste products.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Yeast powered fuel cell feeds on human blood

[leaking pen]

at certain points, such as working anaerobically, there is a massive
slowdown on reproduction, but they DO keep working just to eat and
excrete. also, genetic manipulation to furth reduce, as well as to
shorten lifespan before existing cells die.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Edmund Storms  wrote:
> How about figuring out how to get rid of all the new yeast cells that they
> will produce. Yeasts to no work just to make energy. They work to make more
> of their own kind.  Maybe if the Church permits, micro condoms could be
> used.
>
> Ed
> On Apr 2, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Really. See:
>>
>>
>> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16882-yeastpowered-fuel-cell-feeds-on-human-blood.html
>>
>> It produces ~40 nanowatts which is enough for things like pacemakers.
>>
>> This is actually a good idea. If the device lasts for a long time it will
>> have all of the advantages of a low power implanted cold fusion device. For
>> high power applications such as heart pumps (VAD) and prosthetic arms, a
>> cold fusion device would probably be better. Although, come to think of it,
>> chemical fuel in the body powers natural heart tissue so that should be
>> enough to power a mechanical heart pump.
>>
>> They have not solved the problem of removing the yeast's waste products.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Real time bus schedule

[leaking pen]

I know the bus system here in phoenix has been equipped with gps for a
while.  one of the uses is an automated, you are approaching X street
announcement over the pa system that tags when you reach certain
spots.  THEY have the live tracking, but they havent given it
publicly.  sigh.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> My daughter who lives in Boston sent me this link to a local bus company
> that shows where its buses are in real time, on the map:
>
> http://masco.transloc.com/
>
> This is the kind of thing that could have been done years ago but no one
> thought to do it. In retrospect it is an obvious application of internet and
> GPS technology: easy and cheap to implement and useful to the customers. I
> expect the bus company has been tracking its drivers for a long time,
> although I was surprised to find the other day that a local FedEx truck was
> not equipped with a GPS map.
>
> Many technical problems can be solved more easily than people realize. Often
> the hardest part is to convince people to try something new.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear

[leaking pen]

Umm, thats been known since biosphere 2 days.  They did several
experiments that showed that, but also showed that plants, especially
trees, grew taller but skinner, more knotted (bad for the logging
industry!) and that other plants grew at weird rates as well, and that
it generally caused havoc.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>
> http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=30717
>
> New research from Switzerland and the UK reveals that, somewhat
> paradoxically, plants absorb more carbon dioxide (CO2) when the
> atmosphere is polluted than they do under cleaner skies.
>
> OK that is the finding. Now for the spin.
>
> You can imagine that the word coming from the oil-patch (bush-patch?) is YES! 
> just what we have been saying all along, and furthermore, now that know that 
> CO2 is a good thing for nature and for increasing the growth of biomass, and 
> that the cleaner the skies, the less nature can use CO2 - then full speed 
> ahead with maximum carbon but without any emission controls.
>
> However, that is 'spin' not logic.
>
> But - LOL - the same scientists who found the link, are trying to put a 
> totally different spin on it. Writing in the journal 'Nature', the scientists 
> warn that as air pollution levels continue to decline, "even steeper 
> greenhouse gas emissions cuts will be needed to stabilize the climate." Huh?
>
> Whoa. You have to use your imagination to fathom how this double negative 
> makes sense, but their explanation is not so far-fetched and 'apologetic' as 
> it may at first seem:
>
> Plants rely on the sun to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Although
> it seems counter-intuitive, plants actually absorb CO2 more efficiently
> under hazy sunlight than they do under bright, direct sunlight. When
> exposed to direct sunlight, the leaves at the top of the plant canopy
> get more sunlight than they can use, and go into a defensive mode, while 
> leaves in the shade do not get enough. However, when clouds and minute 
> particles of pollution scatter the light, leaves lower down on the canopy get 
> comparatively more light than in the previous case. As a result, plants 
> absorb CO2 more effectively in diffuse light than in direct light. But the 
> ideal situation, from the biomass perspective is not necessarily to limit CO2
>
> Doh, reducing carbon emissions reduces the CO2 that plants need. And the 
> 'greenhouse' effect can now be appreciated to be due almost exclusively to 
> the other problems - methane and especially halogens. BUT- 'global dimming' 
> due to particulates, has reduced the net greenhouse effect in the recent 
> past, and if we eliminate particulates, that will increase the net greenhouse 
> effect.
>
> Confused yet? The scientists seem to be saying that you either must release 
> dirty CO2 or none at all. Well, that is not quite true - but it highlights 
> the huge grey area we are dealing with in these discussions.
>
> If you are not confused yet, IMHO - then you are not "thinking responsibly". 
> Al Gore is NOT thinking responsibly, NOR are his critics.
>
> Now for the good spin - the free-spin of valid alternatives.
>
> The is one and only one course of action that makes sense.Both camps are 
> misguided - and any rush to judgment is foolish; and yet there is one window 
> of opportunity that gets us where we need to be in ten years. That is- aside 
> from the obvious: which is adding solar and wind to the extent that we can 
> afford to buy those very high-priced solutions.
>
> The only neglected solution IMHO is to take all of the billion$$ that we want 
> and intend to throw at so-called CO2 sequestration, carbon credits, carbon 
> taxes, etc - and shift that into R&D for LENR, hydrino tech, ZPE tech, 
> including magnetic energy and even anti-gravity. These fringe-facets are the 
> ugly stepchild of scince because often they combine more art, intuition, 
> trial-and error, and fringe theory than "real' science permits. But real 
> scicence has failed us. Give the fringe a chance, and my intuition tells me 
> that success will be forthcoming.
>
> We simply do NOT know enough now to say that CO2 is the real culprit, nor 
> that reducing it is the complete answer; but everyone agrees that new energy 
> technology which does not depend on CO2, but promises to be one-fourth to 
> half the cost per kWhr delivered compared to solar or wind - that is the way 
> to go with the billions allocated for CO2 reduction (which will not help 
> anyway).
>
> So why are we waiting? Political inertia.
>
> We still do NOT have a Director of ARPA-E ! nor has any of that all-important 
> seed money for risky R&D gone out to people who can use it.
>
> IOW -take the ARPA-E philosophy - which is a great idea on paper but still is 
> not realized, due to foot-dragging and multiply it by all of the dollars that 
> would be wasted in CO2 sequestration, carbon credits and other nonsense. 
> Forget carbon. Carbon is not the enemy, or at le

Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear

[leaking pen]

The thing is, we are ALREADY doing something.  If we want to do
nothing, then we cut all manmade co2 sources instantly.  doing
SOMETHING is doing just what we are doing already.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> It appears from your analysis that the earth has more self regulating
> capability than most "experts" give it credit for.  Further, it seems to me
> that it will be better to observe and collect more data for a while instead
> of rushing off to do something.  Better to do nothing than to do the wrong
> thing, especially if that wrong thing is massively expensive. Misguided,
> high priced environmental repairs could collapse an already weakened world
> economy.
>
> Jeff
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 12:40 PM
> To: vortex
> Subject: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear
>
>
>
> http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=30717
>
> New research from Switzerland and the UK reveals that, somewhat
> paradoxically, plants absorb more carbon dioxide (CO2) when the
> atmosphere is polluted than they do under cleaner skies.
>
> OK that is the finding. Now for the spin.
>
> You can imagine that the word coming from the oil-patch (bush-patch?) is
> YES! just what we have been saying all along, and furthermore, now that know
> that CO2 is a good thing for nature and for increasing the growth of
> biomass, and that the cleaner the skies, the less nature can use CO2 - then
> full speed ahead with maximum carbon but without any emission controls.
>
> However, that is 'spin' not logic.
>
> But - LOL - the same scientists who found the link, are trying to put a
> totally different spin on it. Writing in the journal 'Nature', the
> scientists warn that as air pollution levels continue to decline, "even
> steeper greenhouse gas emissions cuts will be needed to stabilize the
> climate." Huh?
>
> Whoa. You have to use your imagination to fathom how this double negative
> makes sense, but their explanation is not so far-fetched and 'apologetic' as
> it may at first seem:
>
> Plants rely on the sun to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Although
> it seems counter-intuitive, plants actually absorb CO2 more efficiently
> under hazy sunlight than they do under bright, direct sunlight. When
> exposed to direct sunlight, the leaves at the top of the plant canopy
> get more sunlight than they can use, and go into a defensive mode, while
> leaves in the shade do not get enough. However, when clouds and minute
> particles of pollution scatter the light, leaves lower down on the canopy
> get comparatively more light than in the previous case. As a result, plants
> absorb CO2 more effectively in diffuse light than in direct light. But the
> ideal situation, from the biomass perspective is not necessarily to limit
> CO2
>
> Doh, reducing carbon emissions reduces the CO2 that plants need. And the
> 'greenhouse' effect can now be appreciated to be due almost exclusively to
> the other problems - methane and especially halogens. BUT- 'global dimming'
> due to particulates, has reduced the net greenhouse effect in the recent
> past, and if we eliminate particulates, that will increase the net
> greenhouse effect.
>
> Confused yet? The scientists seem to be saying that you either must release
> dirty CO2 or none at all. Well, that is not quite true - but it highlights
> the huge grey area we are dealing with in these discussions.
>
> If you are not confused yet, IMHO - then you are not "thinking responsibly".
> Al Gore is NOT thinking responsibly, NOR are his critics.
>
> Now for the good spin - the free-spin of valid alternatives.
>
> The is one and only one course of action that makes sense.Both camps are
> misguided - and any rush to judgment is foolish; and yet there is one window
> of opportunity that gets us where we need to be in ten years. That is- aside
> from the obvious: which is adding solar and wind to the extent that we can
> afford to buy those very high-priced solutions.
>
> The only neglected solution IMHO is to take all of the billion$$ that we
> want and intend to throw at so-called CO2 sequestration, carbon credits,
> carbon taxes, etc - and shift that into R&D for LENR, hydrino tech, ZPE
> tech, including magnetic energy and even anti-gravity. These fringe-facets
> are the ugly stepchild of scince because often they combine more art,
> intuition, trial-and error, and fringe theory than "real' science permits.
> But real scicence has failed us. Give the fringe a chance, and my intuition
> tells me that success will be forthcoming.
>
> We simply do NOT know enough now to say that CO2 is the real culprit, nor
> that reducing it is the complete answer; but everyone agrees that new energy
> technology which does not depend on CO2, but promises to be one-fourth to
> half the cost per kWhr delivered compared to solar or wind - that is the way
> to go with the billions allocated for CO2 reduction (which 

Re: [Vo]:Extinct creature still alive?

[leaking pen]

trilos didnt have the tail

looks like a tadpole shrimp to me

http://www.caver.net/shrimp.html

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 8:21 PM,   wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This looks to my untrained eye like a Trilobite.
> http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/photo/3-1323.jpg
>
> (see also http://english.pravda.ru/photo/report/creature-2804/1/)
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear

[leaking pen]

See, theres a big difference between crippling, and causing them to
not make as big of a profit. (remember, this is the industry that has
made new record profits every quarter for the past several years.

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:20 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> I'm all for replacing fossil fuel powered machines with equal or superior
> nonpolluting alternatives.  So far, nothing but nuclear comes close.  All I
> am saying is, don't shut down, dismantle, or otherwise cripple the fossil
> fuel industry until a viable alternative is commercially available.  Solar
> and wind are obviously not it for numerous reasons already posted on this
> forum.
>
> I really hope LENR will solve the problem, and I hope it is soon.
>
> Jeff
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 1:59 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Cc: Edmund Storms
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear
>
> You and many people Jeff, miss an important issue about finding ways
> to reduce CO2 emission.  Yes it is expensive, but so are all changes
> in technology. The expense issue is only a distraction raised by
> industries that will be harmed by the new technology. In contrast, the
> general population always benefits from such efforts because more jobs
> are created and energy becomes cheaper.  Unless you are the owner of
> an oil, gas or coal company, your self interest requires you to
> support any effort to develop any new energy source, but especially
> ones that do not generate CO2 regardless of the cost. The cost will
> eventually be recovered from the energy generated by the new
> technology. Meanwhile, you or your friends would have a job that
> otherwise might not be available.  Also, when CO2 is removed from the
> gas leaving a coal plant, so is mercury and uranium, which is a
> benefit to your health.  You need to look past the propaganda
> generated by the energy industries that would lose profits.
>
> Ed
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Jeff Fink wrote:
>
>> It appears from your analysis that the earth has more self regulating
>> capability than most "experts" give it credit for.  Further, it
>> seems to me
>> that it will be better to observe and collect more data for a while
>> instead
>> of rushing off to do something.  Better to do nothing than to do the
>> wrong
>> thing, especially if that wrong thing is massively expensive.
>> Misguided,
>> high priced environmental repairs could collapse an already weakened
>> world
>> economy.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 12:40 PM
>> To: vortex
>> Subject: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear
>>
>>
>>
>> http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=30717
>>
>> New research from Switzerland and the UK reveals that, somewhat
>> paradoxically, plants absorb more carbon dioxide (CO2) when the
>> atmosphere is polluted than they do under cleaner skies.
>>
>> OK that is the finding. Now for the spin.
>>
>> You can imagine that the word coming from the oil-patch (bush-
>> patch?) is
>> YES! just what we have been saying all along, and furthermore, now
>> that know
>> that CO2 is a good thing for nature and for increasing the growth of
>> biomass, and that the cleaner the skies, the less nature can use CO2
>> - then
>> full speed ahead with maximum carbon but without any emission
>> controls.
>>
>> However, that is 'spin' not logic.
>>
>> But - LOL - the same scientists who found the link, are trying to
>> put a
>> totally different spin on it. Writing in the journal 'Nature', the
>> scientists warn that as air pollution levels continue to decline,
>> "even
>> steeper greenhouse gas emissions cuts will be needed to stabilize the
>> climate." Huh?
>>
>> Whoa. You have to use your imagination to fathom how this double
>> negative
>> makes sense, but their explanation is not so far-fetched and
>> 'apologetic' as
>> it may at first seem:
>>
>> Plants rely on the sun to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. Although
>> it seems counter-intuitive, plants actually absorb CO2 more
>> efficiently
>> under hazy sunlight than they do under bright, direct sunlight. When
>> exposed to direct sunlight, the leaves at the top of the plant canopy
>> get more sunlight than they can use, and go into a defensive mode,
>> while
>> leaves in the shade do not get enough. However, when clouds and minute
>> particles of pollution scatter the light, leaves lower down on the
>> canopy
>> get comparatively more light than in the previous case. As a result,
>> plants
>> absorb CO2 more effectively in diffuse light than in direct light.
>> But the
>> ideal situation, from the biomass perspective is not necessarily to
>> limit
>> CO2
>>
>> Doh, reducing carbon emissions reduces the CO2 that plants need. And
>> the
>> 'greenhouse' effect can now be appreciated to be due almost
>> exclusively to
>> the other problems - methane and especially 

Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear

[leaking pen]

No, i speak of cutting to zero sarcastically.  I used it to make a
point that doing NOTHING is just that, doing NOTHING, and that we are
already doing something by producing co2, so your statement of, we
should do nothing is meaningless.  Its like saying, we are all rowing
our boat down river, someone says, ohh, i think we are approaching a
waterfall!  We should slow down to see before we go over the edge.
And you would be the dude saying, no, full speed ahead, don't be
crazy.

Seriously, you actually took my statement as meaning i think we SHOULD
cut to zero?  You need to work on your reading comprehension, and
learn not to grab onto the one statement you think you can argue
against without actually, say, READING it.

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
>
> What I mean by do nothing is leave the CO2 production rates as they are.
> You talk of cutting man made CO2 to zero like it is possible and desirable.
> You are literally saying that doing nothing is contributing no manmade CO2
> to the environment which means the extinction of the human race!
>
> No fossil fueled power plants, no cooking fires to support the resulting
> cave man existence, and finally, no breathing.
>
> I used to think like this back in junior high school, that the biggest
> problem on earth is people, and that if we eliminate all people the planet
> would be perfect.  I outgrew those thoughts.
>
> Jeff
>
> -Original Message-
> From: leaking pen [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 1:47 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear
>
> The thing is, we are ALREADY doing something.  If we want to do
> nothing, then we cut all manmade co2 sources instantly.  doing
> SOMETHING is doing just what we are doing already.
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
>> It appears from your analysis that the earth has more self regulating
>> capability than most "experts" give it credit for.  Further, it seems to
> me
>> that it will be better to observe and collect more data for a while
> instead
>> of rushing off to do something.  Better to do nothing than to do the wrong
>> thing, especially if that wrong thing is massively expensive. Misguided,
>> high priced environmental repairs could collapse an already weakened world
>> economy.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear

[leaking pen]

No, its to avoid putting additional co2 and other such chemicals into
the environment.  the algae is all gas that has been removed from the
environment.  nice cycle.  Remember, those of use that actually use
logic know that a single approach will not work.

On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: mix...@bigpond.com
> Date: Monday, April 27, 2009 0:57 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Not what Algore wanted to hear
>
>> In reply to  Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 26 Apr 2009 23:45:08 -
>> 0400:Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >If you want a reliable and continous supply of power, solar and
>> wind
>> >will not give you that unless you can figure out how to store the
>> >generated power cost effectively.
>> [snip]
>> As already discussed frequently on this list, solar can be captured
>> and stored
>> using algae. This is essentially what we are already using when we
>> burn coal.
>> We would just be shortening the cycle time from millions of years
>> to months.
>> While wind and solar don't actually supply continuous electric
>> power, they are
>> also not as bad as you might think. To start with wind may be
>> variable, but if
>> connected to a continent wide grid, then the wind is always blowing
>> somewhere,which helps to reduce the size of the "bumps and
>> hollows". Solar would supply
>> direct power only during the day, but then that is also when most
>> power is
>> needed. At night, energy stored in the form of biomass could
>> supplement that
>> supplied by wind, to ensure a continuous supply.
>> Furthermore, as I have also pointed out in the past, it should
>> prove both
>> feasible and cheap to store energy as heat underground in molten
>> salt. At the
>> temperature at which common table salt melts, the Carnot efficiency
>> could be as
>> high as 62%. This could provide a means of storing solar energy
>> through the
>> night at a cost up to 1000 times less than that of lead-acid
>> batteries.If the solar energy is collected in a desert where there
>> is very little cloud
>> cover from day to day, then storage for much more than a day would be
>> unnecessary, particularly if multiple solar plants contributed,
>> that were
>> geographically widely distributed.
>>
>> Then there are also other clean power sources that can contribute
>> during the
>> night - hydro, tidal, geothermal.
>> In short, by utilizing an effective mix of different clean sources,
>> a reliable
>> power supply can be achieved, without fossil fuels, if we really
>> wanted to.
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>
> Isn't the point of adopting solar and wind power to avoid burning
> combustibles?
> Growing a biomass like algae as a source of fuel seems to defeat this.
> On the other hand if we eat the algae...
> harry
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] H1N1 Synchronicity

[leaking pen]

So, the so called swine flu may just be spanish flu?  the puerco flu?

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> An interactive article on the current outbreak of H1N1 and the virus'
> impact in 1918:
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/interactive/2008/jan/03/flu
>
> And for the conspiricist minded:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sykes
>
> "Exhumation for biological research
>
> In 2007, nearly 90 years after Sir Mark Sykes died, all the living
> descendants gave their permission to exhume his body for scientific
> investigation headed by virologist, Prof John Oxford. His remains were
> exhumed in mid-September 2008[3]. His remains were of interest because
> he had been buried in a lead-lined coffin, and this was thought likely
> to have preserved Spanish Flu viral particles intact. Any samples
> taken are to be used for research in the quest to develop defences
> against the next flu pandemic, which some scientists[who?] believe is
> likely to flare up at some stage in the future as a mutation of the
> bird flu virus named H5N1. The Spanish Flu virus itself became a human
> infection by a mutation of an avian virus nowadays called H1N1. There
> are only five other extant samples of the Spanish Flu virus. Prof
> Oxford's team were expecting to find a well preserved cadaver.[4]
> However, the lead lined coffin was found to be split because of the
> weight of soil over it, and the cadaver was found to be badly
> decomposed. Nonetheless, samples of lung and brain tissue were taken
> through the split in the coffin, with the coffin remaining in situ in
> the grave during this process.[5]Soon afterwards, the open grave was
> sealed again by refilling it with earth."
>
> You must admit, it would solve the unemployment problem.
>
> Terry
>
>

Re: FW: [Vo]:[OT] H1N1 Synchronicity

[leaking pen]

WOOT!  I for one think that the immigration and naturalization act was
the biggest stain on the face of our constitution and declaration to
ever be passed as law.  My mother immigrated legally from canada, my
fathers family came over before it WAS the united states, and they
just, came. no legal or illegal about it.  So many others came through
ellis island where you told your name, drew an x, and boom, you're an
American.  That is how we are SUPPOSED to be.  No racism, religionism,
favoritism, paperwork, quotas and limits.  Come be an American, chase
that dream, live the good life!  ALL men are created equal
motherfuckers, not just the ones that got here before we decided to
bar the door and man the gates.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, grok  wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> As the smoke cleared, Jeff Fink 
> mounted the barricade and roared out:
>
>> I have a friend Jozef from Slovakia back when it was Czechoslovakia.  He was
>> in med school intending to be a doctor.  He ran afoul of the communist
>> government on faith issues, was removed from med school and assigned to be
>> an X-ray technician (no freedom of choice here). That may not sound too bad
>> to some people on this forum, but what you don't know is that, at that time,
>> eastern European facilities used no shielding: X-ray technician was a death
>> sentence.  (Isn't communism wonderful?)  Soon after, he escaped to freedom
>> in the US where he could be what he wanted.
>
> First thing: this was not "communism", or even "socialism". It was what
> we call _stalinism_, for want of a better word.
>
> Second thing: I think your friend is a liar.
>
>
>
>
>
>> By the way, he immigrated legally.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> What, like cuban boat people, or pro-U.S. terrorists?
> Pfft. FUCK bourgeois "legality". I'd help a mexican sneak over the U.S.
> border ANY day. And twice on sundays. Having been an illegal alien
> myself, for that matter.
>
>
> - -- grok.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - --
> Build the North America-wide General Strike.
>
> TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
> TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
> ALL power to the councils and communes.
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkn6MqIACgkQXo3EtEYbt3GQ3ACgqBVSySa4uBjEBMxbQP2oJBZH
> Bo0AoJAZ3NN/pBgA3JdQhOf8N+VjPqyF
> =uEHB
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>

Re: [Vo]:LENR-CANR and CBS video offline

[leaking pen]

Indeed, if they popped it on a server for lesser videos, and it got
more popular than they intended, that could cause it to stop working
for a while.

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> My ISP lost my e-mail address and credit card number, and then pulled
> LENR-CANR.org off-line today because the bill was 30 days overdue. I
> suggested they should have looked at the front page of the web site because
> it has my name, phone number and e-mail address. Very annoying! It should be
> back on line momentarily.
>
> More ominously, the CBS news site showing the cold fusion segment does not
> work. This could be a technical problem because the site is still there, but
> it does not play:
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4955212n
>
> This site says the video disappeared even though it was popular:
>
> http://sitfu.blogspot.com/2009/04/cbs-censors-cold-fusion-video-was.html
>
> "CBS Censors Cold Fusion Video - Was Fourth Most Popular
>
> Dear friends,
>
> The highly revealing 12-minute video clip from 60 Minutes on the fascinating
> resurgence of cold fusion I mentioned in a message yesterday has now been
> removed by CBS. I highly suspect media censorship at work here. A supporter
> emailed to tell me that the embedded video from an article I had posted on
> this at examiner.com was not working. Checking back on my original links to
> the video revealed that a weak clip of less than two-minutes had replaced
> the engaging, longer original.
>
> After some careful research, I discovered that the 12-minute video had moved
> up to the fourth most popular on the entire CBS website. Following the link
> on the CBS video page in the "Most Viewed Videos" section at the bottom, I
> found that though there were 70 comments posted under the video, it no
> longer functioned. I suspect someone didn't want us to see that video. What
> other reason would there be to censor this powerful clip? For more on this,
> see the informative article I posted here.
>
> Please take advantage of the power of the Internet to spread the word, so
> that we can break through this kind of censorship. . . ."
>
> I suspect this person is wrong, because if the MIB did not want us to see
> it, they would not leave the non-functioning screen.
>
>
>
>
>
> Earlier, Steve Krivit reported that the video has been altered:
>
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/?p=74
>
> "'We asked the American Physical Society, the top physics organization in
> America, to recommend an independent scientist,' the narrator said. 'They
> gave us Rob Duncan.'
>
> The sentence referring to the American Physical Society has been removed
> from the video and replaced with the following text, 'We asked another
> distinguished physicist to have a look at the research.' There were no other
> apparent changes to the video."
>
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: FW: [Vo]:[OT] H1N1 Synchronicity

[leaking pen]

Because we make it a living hell for them, so they make some money,
head back, and then try to use that money t buck the system and get in
legally.

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>
> I think what troubles many Americans on a deeper level
> is why some immigrants don't stay. ;-)
>
> Harry
>
> - Original Message -
> From: leaking pen 
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009 8:26 am
> Subject: Re: FW: [Vo]:[OT] H1N1 Synchronicity
>
>> WOOT!  I for one think that the immigration and naturalization act was
>> the biggest stain on the face of our constitution and declaration to
>> ever be passed as law.  My mother immigrated legally from canada, my
>> fathers family came over before it WAS the united states, and they
>> just, came. no legal or illegal about it.  So many others came through
>> ellis island where you told your name, drew an x, and boom, you're an
>> American.  That is how we are SUPPOSED to be.  No racism, religionism,
>> favoritism, paperwork, quotas and limits.  Come be an American, chase
>> that dream, live the good life!  ALL men are created equal
>> motherfuckers, not just the ones that got here before we decided to
>> bar the door and man the gates.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:22 PM, grok  wrote:
>> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> > Hash: SHA1
>> >
>> >
>> > As the smoke cleared, Jeff Fink 
>> > mounted the barricade and roared out:
>> >
>> >> I have a friend Jozef from Slovakia back when it was
>> Czechoslovakia.  He was
>> >> in med school intending to be a doctor.  He ran afoul of the
>> communist>> government on faith issues, was removed from med school
>> and assigned to be
>> >> an X-ray technician (no freedom of choice here). That may not
>> sound too bad
>> >> to some people on this forum, but what you don't know is that,
>> at that time,
>> >> eastern European facilities used no shielding: X-ray technician
>> was a death
>> >> sentence.  (Isn't communism wonderful?)  Soon after, he escaped
>> to freedom
>> >> in the US where he could be what he wanted.
>> >
>> > First thing: this was not "communism", or even "socialism". It
>> was what
>> > we call _stalinism_, for want of a better word.
>> >
>> > Second thing: I think your friend is a liar.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> By the way, he immigrated legally.
>> >>
>> >> Jeff
>> >
>> > What, like cuban boat people, or pro-U.S. terrorists?
>> > Pfft. FUCK bourgeois "legality". I'd help a mexican sneak over
>> the U.S.
>> > border ANY day. And twice on sundays. Having been an illegal alien
>> > myself, for that matter.
>> >
>> >
>> > - -- grok.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > - --
>> > Build the North America-wide General Strike.
>> >
>> > TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
>> > TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
>> > ALL power to the councils and communes.
>> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>> >
>> > iEYEARECAAYFAkn6MqIACgkQXo3EtEYbt3GQ3ACgqBVSySa4uBjEBMxbQP2oJBZH
>> > Bo0AoJAZ3NN/pBgA3JdQhOf8N+VjPqyF
>> > =uEHB
>> > -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] H1N1 Synchronicity

[leaking pen]

I think hes SHOWING you the answer.
But he has a good point.  just what does that have to do with the
price of tea in china?

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 1:31 PM, albedo5  wrote:
> Are you truly incapable of answering a simple question, grok?
>
> Inquiring minds wanna know now.
>
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM, grok  wrote:
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>> As the smoke cleared, OrionWorks 
>> mounted the barricade and roared out:
>>
>> > You sure don't sound like a very happy person to me. Perhaps it
>> > explains why you have dodged the previous question: "What makes you
>> > happy, Grok?"
>>
>> What really IS amazing is how you people consistently dodge the very real
>> issue of the pseudo-democracies known as the U.S.A./NATO having become
>> pretty much full-fledge police states. The ad hominem tack you invariably
>> resort to, instead, is really kinda pathetically ludicrous.
>>
>> It's a shame OU and CF et al. are all tied up in politix (and will be,
>> for the interim). That fact makes these exchanges pretty nigh
>> unavoidable. Anywhere there's real and honest debate, that is.
>>
>>
>> - -- grok.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> - --
>> Build the North America-wide General Strike.
>>
>> TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
>> TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
>> ALL power to the councils and communes.
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAkn7WqIACgkQXo3EtEYbt3H2iQCgoYFAnsrVQjMgMVgk4hPI8x/l
>> Lp8AoOYoXqaBT6FAQUH/Y55OK9VV4N9F
>> =/AhK
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[leaking pen]

try searching cyanoacrylate accelerator

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
> A couple decades ago I was, for a brief time, a (not very good) hardware
> design engineer.  In the lab, we used cyanoacrylate to glue parts to
> boards, and we used spray bottles of activator to harden the stuff.  And
> so I learned that Krazy glue and related products, which normally only
> stick well to fingers, can be made to stick where and when you want them
> to, if you just use a spritz of activator on it.
>
> After that little epiphany, I purchased cyanoacrylate at the local Radio
> Shack a number of times, and always got hardener with it.  Later I
> purchased some at a hardware store, and again got the hardener with it.
>  The stuff was great; it would stick, no questions asked, to just about
> anything -- as long as one used the activator.
>
> Then a few years went by during which I didn't buy the stuff -- didn't
> do any projects which needed it, hadn't used up the old stock.
>
> And one day I went to the local hardware store and looked for
> cyanoacrylate with hardener.  No luck -- none on the shelves.  I asked a
> clerk; he'd *never* *heard* of hardener for cyanoacrylate!  (Of course
> that just means they hadn't carried it any time in the last couple
> months, but none the less it was a bit startling.)
>
> Later I checked Radio Shack.  Same deal -- no hardener, clerks had never
> heard of the stuff.  Hardener is for epoxy, that's all they knew about.
>
> I've looked in other stores since; it's always the same. They don't
> carry it and as far as they know, there is no such thing, and never was.
>
> Somebody seems to have erased cyanoacrylate activator from the page of
> time.  Anybody here know what happened?
>
> Why'd it get pulled from the market?  Does the stuff turn out to make
> your head swell up and turn purple or something?  Or can you get high
> off of it?
>
> (Or have I just been unlucky in 5 out of 5 stores I've tried, and the
> stuff really is still on the shelves *somewhere*?)
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[leaking pen]

hunh. I've seen it at craft stores, but not hardware.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> try searching cyanoacrylate accelerator
>
> Sigh... OK, yes, I should have done that to start with.  Actually I
> rather hoped there was some interesting tale behind the disappearance
> which someone here would know.
>
> So it appears the stuff is still available mail order, from some places
> -- but why'd it disappear from retail store shelves?  20 years ago it
> was in the glue section of every hardware store I shopped in.  It
> certainly seems like something happened and I still don't know what.
> Quote from one page:
>
> "I finally ran out of Zip Kicker and the hobby shop I purchased it from
> originally is long gone. All the local hobby shops fail to carry it as
> well."
>
> No explanation, and none of the replies mentioned any explanation; just
> a statement of what I've already observed.
>
> And, I should add, a lot of alternatives for use as accelerators were
> mentioned, including baking soda and white glue, which I didn't know
> about.  Useful info, maybe.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:send Bill B some money for putting up with a lot

[leaking pen]

Perhaps we remove vob and just institute a swear jar type thing.  a
buck fee for starting an ot post, a quarter per post you make within
such a thread.

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:15 AM, OrionWorks  wrote:
>> Good call, Frank.
>>
>> - Rick
>
> I would agree. Sometimes I wish Mr. Beaty was less modest about these
> matters and would send out a friendly reminder/suggestion, perhaps at
> the beginning of each year. There's nothing wrong with telling the
> Vort Collective that it costs money (presumably mostly Bill's money)
> to keep the service going.
>
> I just got paid today. Time for me to pay my rant money.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Zitter and ZPE

[leaking pen]

Reminds me of my thoughts the first time I was introduced to
superstring theory.  the expanding contracting "strings" sure sounded
to me as the 3 from 4 dimensional equivilant to cutting a chord across
a 3 dimensional wave form, and as the wave moves, getting shrinking
and contracting lines on your 2 cut.

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Mauro Lacy  wrote:
> Jones Beene wrote:
>>
>> All this talk about ESP and its possible scientific basis -- got me
>> thinking about the “z-word” once again. Not to mention how hard it is
>> to separate the pursuit of free energy from less divine pursuits
>> (depending on one’s z-orientation, of course)
>>
>> Caveat: "Lethal Text" follows... meaning that it usually confounds
>> non-believers…
>>
>> …and/or … “what you don't know can't skill you”
>>
>> “Back in the day” I could remember how to pronounce “zitterbewegung”.
>> Not any more, much less spell it. It is almost “lethal text” and
>> everytime the word pops into consciousness, I feel compelled to
>> consult the internet (and spell checker). You can, of course, take the
>> implications of the z-word to extremes. For instance – that a
>> “modulation of z” can transfer info and supply a very provocative
>> answer to many theological questions.
>>
>> It’s almost like- “in the beginning was the word, and the word was…
>> you know: “zitterbewegung”. That one is kinda hard to get into Hebrew,
>> so they changed it to a few consonants. Perhaps that is another reason
>> for the “addiction” of “free energy” and for trying to accomplish what
>> the Grand Poobahs of fissix tell us is an impossible goal.
>>
>> This time, when the wider implications of ZPE came to mind, an old
>> mini-essay on LT also popped-up in connection with the word and it
>> mentioned “lethal text” which is like a "forbidden-fruit" kind of
>> thing... you know, cosmic foaming at the mouth - but its what they
>> call ZPE in them ivory towers and if there is such a thing as
>> modulated zitterbewegung (aether-conditioning so-to-speak) then it may
>> be the driving force for finding free-energy in two very different
>> ways – one of which has ‘information transfer from afar’ overtones.
>>
>> Side Note: As for what are the wider implications of lethal text - in
>> Piers Anthony's story - "Macroscope", an alien message destroys the
>> mind of anyone intelligent enough to understand it- no doubt that it
>> contained the z-word. All of which was kind of a take-off on Sir ACC’s
>> infamous "earworm" from a short story called "The Ultimate Melody".
>> Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" has the LT show up in broadband as a
>> computer virus. The most famous version – that is, outside the Bible
>> (where we find the original LT (i.e. YHWH)… that probably goes back to
>> the "Sirens' song" of the old "Odyssey," not to be confused with the
>> remake "A Space Odyssey" and the five notes you will never forget:
>> zit...err..be...we...gung? At least in the good-book you were once
>> no-vowelly protected from a lethal dose.
>>
>> Anyway, in one of his most widely read essays (both short and
>> 'pregnant'), Hal Puthoff opines that Gravity can be understood as a
>> kind of long-range Casimir force. This kind of ties into the notion to
>> how it is that YHWH could whisper little secrets in W’s ear about WMD,
>> and also the apprehension that when we finally do harness ZPE for free
>> energy, there will be a cost. (hell to pay??)
>>
>> Some of this goes back to the ruskie H-bomb man, physicist Andrei
>> Sakharov, who put forward the radical hypothesis that gravity might
>> not be a fundamental interaction at all, but is another form of
>> resonant aether-conditioning so-to-speak. If gravity is a secondary or
>> residual effect associated with other the EM field and with
>> interdimensional effects, then the ZPE connection is somewhat easier
>> to understand. If correct, gravity would then be understood as just
>> another variation on the Casimir theme, in which background
>> zero-point-energy pressures were again responsible, and with
>> implications for “information transfer”.
>>
>> Anyway, the z-approach to gravity was addressed by Puthoff by showing
>> that every particle is situated in the sea of electromagnetic
>> zero-point fluctuations develops this "jitter" motion; and when there
>> are two or more particles they are each influenced not only by the
>> fluctuating background field, but also by the fields generated by the
>> other particles, all similarly undergoing a "contact-high" of
>> epo-moderated motion, add the inter-particle coupling and a measure of
>> large scale asymmetry brought on by curvature…
>>
>> …and voila – there you have it: the zed-connection and its ubiquitous
>> signature - not exactly the mark of Zorro but the ultraviolet glow of
>> foamy cosmic glue.
>>
>
> That's wonderful, Jones. Thank you for all those literary, musical, and
> scientific references.
> Zitterbewegung, the observed oscilation or modulation between
> interacting positive and negat

Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

Umm, if we are talking nanometer distances...  water is, due to
naturally h+ and oh - dissasociation, going to have pockets of charge.
 mighten they not be moving towards each other, but towards the same
patch of water?

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/04/does-dna-have-t.html
>
> Does DNA Have Telepathic Properties?
>
> DNA has been found to have a bizarre ability to put itself together,
> even at a distance, when according to known science it shouldn't be
> able to. Explanation: None, at least not yet.
>
> Scientists are reporting evidence that contrary to our current beliefs
> about what is possible, intact double-stranded DNA has the “amazing”
> ability to recognize similarities in other DNA strands from a
> distance. Somehow they are able to identify one another, and the tiny
> bits of genetic material tend to congregate with similar DNA. The
> recognition of similar sequences in DNA’s chemical subunits, occurs in
> a way unrecognized by science. There is no known reason why the DNA is
> able to combine the way it does, and from a current theoretical
> standpoint this feat should be chemically impossible.
>
> Even so, the research published in ACS’ Journal of Physical Chemistry
> B, shows very clearly that homology recognition between sequences of
> several hundred nucleotides occurs without physical contact or
> presence of proteins. Double helixes of DNA can recognize matching
> molecules from a distance and then gather together, all seemingly
> without help from any other molecules or chemical signals.
>
> In the study, scientists observed the behavior of fluorescently tagged
> DNA strands placed in water that contained no proteins or other
> material that could interfere with the experiment. Strands with
> identical nucleotide sequences were about twice as likely to gather
> together as DNA strands with different sequences. No one knows how
> individual DNA strands could possibly be communicating in this way,
> yet somehow they do. The “telepathic” effect is a source of wonder and
> amazement for scientists.
>
> “Amazingly, the forces responsible for the sequence recognition can
> reach across more than one nanometer of water separating the surfaces
> of the nearest neighbor DNA,” said the authors Geoff S. Baldwin,
> Sergey Leikin, John M. Seddon, and Alexei A. Kornyshev and colleagues.
>
> This recognition effect may help increase the accuracy and efficiency
> of the homologous recombination of genes, which is a process
> responsible for DNA repair, evolution, and genetic diversity. The new
> findings may also shed light on ways to avoid recombination errors,
> which are factors in cancer, aging, and other health issues.
>
> 
>
>

Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

Exactly.  the more i think of it, the more i wonder also...  a lot of
dna movement in liquids , the charge and polarity, is based on the
final few bps on each end.  I wonder if same bp ends but different
strands would end up together...

that or size in general.  you know, the same thing that makes western
blots work.

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:08 PM,   wrote:
> In reply to  leaking pen's message of Sat, 23 May 2009 10:15:40 -0700:
> Hi,
>
> I think you are almost on the right track. There was recently a demonstration 
> of
> how water molecules could align with one another to a depth of hundreds of
> thousands of molecules away from a surface. In so doing they form a dielectric
> layer(*) that has the effect of "communicating" the charge from one side to 
> the
> other. The implication is that the charge pattern along the DNA strand would 
> be
> thus communicated and the strands most likely to be attracted, would be those
> with the closest matching opposite charges IOW with the "matching" pattern.
>
> * In a capacitor, the presence of a dielectric effectively reduces the 
> distance
> between the plates.
>
>>Umm, if we are talking nanometer distances...  water is, due to
>>naturally h+ and oh - dissasociation, going to have pockets of charge.
>> mighten they not be moving towards each other, but towards the same
>>patch of water?
> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Zitter and ZPE

[leaking pen]

its not just genetic inability to mate. its also social. For example,
bobcats will and still sometimes DO sucessfully mate with housecats
with non mule offspring. but they generally do not, from a social
standpoint. Darwins finches that speciated apart did so in large part
not because of genetics, but because as they found different niches to
feed in from teh changing bills, they simply were in different areas
of the islands.  Mud stabbing bug eaters just never associated with
wide billed nutcrackers.  doesn't meant that if you artifically
changed their environments they COULDN'T possibly end up mating, they
just don't.

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Horace Heffner  wrote:
>
> On May 24, 2009, at 2:07 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 24 May 2009 01:03:41 -0800:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> The distinguishing characteristic is the inability to mate with
>>> the parents, or at least with some of the animals the parents can
>>> mate with, which can be due to a genetic characteristic that does not
>>> manifest in a visible way.
>>
>> Agreed this is the definition of species.
>>
>>> In any case I don't think speciation
>>> occurs in a single birth, but rather as a gradual migration of
>>> combined traits through a population. Speciation often occurs due to
>>> the geographical separation of populations of a single species. If a
>>> single birth occurred of an animal unable to mate with any others,
>>> then that new species would have no future because it would need
>>> others of its kind with which to mate.
>>
>> This appears to lead to a problem with regard to the definition of
>> species.
>>
>> In short how can any new species exist if it can't mate, and if it can
>> mate,
>> then it is not a new species. We seem to have a paradox.
>
> No paradox is necessary - provided speciation occurs gradually in a large
> population. It seems to me likely that the *probability* of offspring due to
> genetic feasibility must change gradually throughout a population as
> mutations occur through time.
>
> It seems to me also true the probability of mating itself may change due to
> mutations, and this is a form of of natural selection.  The gradual
> development of an appearance change amongst a sub-population of a species
> could gradually isolate that group genetically, even though it is not
> isolated geographically.
>
> Speciation is likely the combined effect of many mutations, and
> sub-populations along the way might be less likely to produce offspring when
> mated with each other.  The larger the number of mutations, the less the
> probability of offspring.  I think even when some differing species are
> mated, there is a finite but very small probability of offspring surviving
> at least to birth.  Eventually, mutation can drive the probability of viable
> offspring to zero for all practical purposes.  The gradual nature of
> speciation is thus driven by probabilites rather than absolutes.  This makes
> the chicken and egg problem difficult, because it is difficult to define the
> first chicken, or to distinguish it from its parents.
>
>
>
>>
>> IOW you are suggesting that small populations speciate as a whole, rather
>> than
>> individuals.
>
> Yes
>
>> This would appear to be possible with regard to characteristics
>> that do not influence the ability to produce fertile offspring, however
>> that
>> then is no longer the definition of a new species.
>
> It seems to me unlikely that single mutations produce new species, and that
> the process normally must take a long time, multiple mutations, and isolated
> populations, geographically or otherwise.  The process of speciation might
> be highly influenced by environmental factors however, and such a speciation
> even could be rapid.  A sudden change of environment could bring on the
> immediate and simultanenous *expression* of many genes at once via epigentic
> influence, and this expression could simultaneously impact large portions of
> a population, as well as their genetic compatibility.   Alternatively, large
> segments of DNA could be sown throughout a population via viral infection,
> creating a group of individuals incompatible with the prior population, but
> compatible with each other.  Evolution may have multiple pathways available.
>
>
>>
>> The only natural solution I can think of is that a new species is created
>> when a
>> genetic mutation occurs in all the offspring of a single individual, and
>> those
>> offspring mate with one another.
>>
>> The only alternatives I can think of are "unnatural", i.e. genetic
>> manipulation,
>> or the same mutation occurring at the same time in different individuals,
>> that
>> then produce offspring that can mate. The latter would however appear to
>> be far
>> less likely than mating between offspring from the same parent.
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
>>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mta

Re: [Vo]:Roswell Debris Confirmed

[leaking pen]

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:49 PM, grok  wrote:
>

>
> Oh, and BTW, you can't use the word "collective" in Vortex.   That is
> for VortexB only.
>

We are the Vortex.  Resistance is Futile.  You will be educated.

Re: Great biological mystery force Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

I knew this article reminded me of something.  Thanks Bill.


btw, cant resist.

"Watch ribosomes come flying in from a distance, then somehow finding and
docking to a pore on the nucleus membrane.  What attracts them to the
membrane?  How to they find the pore itself?  Wouldn't there have to be
some kind of weird, "key-lock" attractive force that pulls that particular
pore-type protein to that particular ribosome-type protein?"

Im now imagining a rick moranis ribosome wandering around the cell,
are you the gatekeeper?  I am the keymaster.

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:36 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2009, Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>> http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/04/does-dna-have-t.html
>>
>> Does DNA Have Telepathic Properties?
>
> Terry, there's also a "DNA Telepathy" announcement from two or three years
> back, where two portions of DNA crystal were found to have identical
> segments via fluorescent tagging ...even though they were on either side
> of a membrane, and separated by many nanometers.  Someone here at the UW
> published a paper on it.  Search on "dna telepathy" for old hits? Here's
> one http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080124103151.htm
>
>
> Also, there's an enormous unsolved problem in biology which is similar to
> this 'telepathy' problem, yet nobody talks about it:
>  In living cells, how to "keys" and "locks" almost instantly find each
>  other over vast distances, and how can they do it in an environment
>  where organized water behaves as a solid at the micro-level?
>
> This problem becomes very obvious in the famous Harvard animation of the
> workings of a cell,   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZZ3DD_tV9k
> http://multimedia.mcb.harvard.edu/media.html
>
> Watch ribosomes come flying in from a distance, then somehow finding and
> docking to a pore on the nucleus membrane.  What attracts them to the
> membrane?  How to they find the pore itself?  Wouldn't there have to be
> some kind of weird, "key-lock" attractive force that pulls that particular
> pore-type protein to that particular ribosome-type protein?
>
> And next, immediately the film shows another mystery, where the tip of a
> nucleus RNA comes flying up from below, docks with the pore/ribosome
> assembly, and starts "running the tape" to assemble a protein.  Why was
> the tip of the RNA strand attracted to the nuclear membrane?  How could
> it seek out the membrane pore?   (Stupid hint, grin: imagine that the
> video takes place in total darkness, so the molecules can't see where to go!)
>
> In other parts of the film, the animators didn't solve the mystery by
> illustrating unknown forces which nobody talks about.  Instead they did it
> by cheating.  When a fiber of actin or tubulin assembles itself, the
> animators simply created a film of these fibers dissolving, with all the
> broken parts diffusing away.  THEN THEY RAN THE FILM BACKWARDS!  It's a
> total violation of 3rd law entropy, with time running backwards.
> Molecules come flying in from vast distances and link onto the growing
> fiber tip.  What force drives this amazing phenomenon? More importantly,
> what forces select the proper type of molecule subunit, and only attracts
> that type of molecule towards the growing end of the fiber?  What
> mechanism can make it seem that time can run backwards, to assemble
> subcellular fibers?
>
> Nobody knows.
>
> Long ago it was explained by diffusion.  But then calculations showed that
> diffusion took too much time.   Then years later the discovery of solid
> "organized intracellular water" made the problem even more inexplicable.
>
> I suspect that the real problem is psychological:
>
>   Since we KNOW that cellular biology has nearly all problems solved, and
>   no huge revolutions in biological science happen anymore, therefore
>   it's impossible that any "vast unknown" could still exist.  (If it did,
>   it would make our contemporary science look ignorant and primitive,
>   like something from last century! )  So, there's really nothing left to
>   explore, at least nothing big.  We're only cleaning up the details,
>   such as the protein-folding mystery.
>
> And so, if an entire community of smart and highly trained people looks
> directly at an enormous unsolved problem ...they won't see it.  They're
> selectively blind. And it's not even the complicated problems that they
> miss.  It's the obvious ones that even little kids would point out.
> "Daddy, why does the continent of Africa fit onto south America like two
> pieces of a puzzle? Mommy, why does that animation of molecules look like
> time is running backwards?"  If mommy is a cell biologist, then...
> "shut up kid, you aren't smart enough to understand."  But the little kid
> is right.
>
>
>> DNA has been found to have a bizarre ability to put itself together,
>> even at a distance, when according to known science it shouldn't be
>> able to. Explanation: None, at least not yet.
>
> What's realy amazing: your news item cau

Re: Great biological mystery force Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

well, that wont put me into sleep dep.   I go into rem about 4 minutes
after falling asleep.  i actually sleep BETTER in 1 hour cat naps.
(And ive just found, thats a main symptom of narcolepsy.  explains a
lot actually)

Something to remember. electrons don't actaully orbit the nucleus.
they bounce around randomly, perhaps actually appearing and
dissapearing, or, tunneling, within vague cloud like areas known as
orbitals (because of the old Neils Bohr orbital model of the atom. )

These orbitals are actually what cause the transmission spectrums, the
transmission spectra is based on an electron absorbing energy,
temporarily getting a boost up to a higher orbital, then dropping back
down in rank to where it was before. releasing a photon that is the
exact energy, and thus frequency (and thus color) of the amount of
energy difference between the two states. This is why each atom has a
pretty unique spectrum, its based in large part on the top filled
orbitals.


When electrons are "shared" in a chemical bond, they bounce back and
forth between the filled orbitals of the paired atoms, spending
weekends with daddy and weeks with mommy (mommy being the most
electronegative of the pair, if they arent the same atom)  Now, this
fact, based on the distances involved in chemical bonds, means that
the electrons are jumping at least the actual radius of the atom more
than they were before. And, i recall a video i saw in chemistry long
ago that showed mapping of this electron motion.  Basically, it showed
the general shape of an orbital , the p orbital as i recall, formed by
mapping the position of the electron as it moved.  there were several
outliers, like, edge of the screen dots.  I asked my prof at the time
if that meant the electron was now and then bouncing way outside of
the orbital.  His statement, i don't think so, i think its just noise,
but it might be.  (Favorite chem teacher ever.  Was not afraid to say,
I don't know. )

might that form of electron tunneling be your radio signal?  jumping
to orbitals that are the exact same energy, because its the same
element at the same energy state?

Alex


On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 4:03 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> Im now imagining a rick moranis ribosome wandering around the cell,
>> are you the gatekeeper?  I am the keymaster.
>
> Give Moranis a radio direction finder, and it all becomes easy!
>
> Actually, my previous message was a lead-in to one of my old rants,
> http://amasci.com/tesla/biores.html
>
> Years ago I suffered a 'visionary experience,' and gained insights into
> all sorts of weird topics, plus much delusional crap which doesn't work
> when tested.  Among it all was a tidbit:  the idea that anomalous
> biological forces exist, forces which act like radio transmitters and
> receivers, with key-codes to allow biomolecules to be attracted together
> over many nanometers distance.  At the time I was mostly unaware of the
> unsolved problem in biology, but I'd had suspicions.
>
> Heres the quick description:
>
>  - Even though electrons orbiting atoms don't radiate photons, they
>   do create an extremely intense AC field in the nearfield region
>   surrounding the atom.   It's related to AC Casmir forces.
>
> Physicists would see this as QM, as a field of virtual photons at the
> frequency of the atom's absorption line, an AC field of indeterminate
> phase, oriented along an indeterminate axis.  Electrical engineers would
> imagine that every atom is a tiny AC electromagnet driven by a sinewave
> source.  The atom's local field is AC, so there's no average force being
> applied to nearby matter.  And atoms don't radiate continuously (i.e.
> there's no loss mechanism.)  So, if an electron's period is in the
> infrared frequencies, the atom will have an AC field which extends outward
> to 1/4 infrared wavelength (or hundreds of nanometers.)
>
> So atoms are different than we believe.  They're much larger.   But only
> identical atoms could "feel" this large size.
>
> Example: sodium atoms possess an intense AC field at the sodium line
> frequency, and if two sodium atoms are ultra-cold and not moving fast with
> Doppler shift, the oscillations are identical for both atoms,
> synchronized.  They act like bar magnets attracting each other.  But these
> are AC electromagnets. They only see other sodiums, and won't respond to
> other atoms having a different frequency.  But what if two sodium atoms
> happen to be out of phase?  Even if they have identical frequency, might
> they not repel instead of attracting?  Well, that's the same problem as
> two magnets having their poles out of orientation.  Like two magnets
> they'd experience repulsion, a torque, then th

Re: Great biological mystery force Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 2:10 AM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>

>
> People in the "uberman/polyphasic sleep" community think it's a learnable
> behavior.  Perhaps it helps to start out with unusual brain chemistry!
> But at least in my own case, my creative insanity switches on only when I
> carefully avoid processed food (normal american chow).  Heh: and then I
> start getting city parking spaces at the Jedi Master level of anomalous
> luck.
>
Really?  I should look them up.  If its causing my blood sugar issues
and falling asleep at work, id almost be willing to do something to
change the  no no i wouldnt.  I LOVE being able to take a 5 minute
nap and have a 15 minute subjective time frame dream.

To digress just a little, I discovered your essays on the wave nature
of traffic about a month before getting my license (got it at 22.
Just didn't need one sooner, i took the bus everywhere. ) and had a
massive impact on my driving style.  Without speeding, i always get
places before friends that speed becuase , Being unworried, relaxed,
letting the road itself dictate things, i get openings when i need
them to change lanes just appearing before me, my lights are always
green, and people pull out of parking spots right in front of me the
moment i enter the lot.  Friends of mine riding with me are mystified
and amazed. And i find that if im running late, in a rush, harried,
angry, wanting everything to move faster.   I get screwed with red
lights, walls of cars, and no spots to park.
I actually bought a website, churchoftheroad, to do a little something
about that kind of thing, but, alas, still is a blank page.  But i
digress..
>> Something to remember. electrons don't actaully orbit the nucleus.
>
> Yep, that's the visualizable grade-school diagram.  (Or the diagram of
> Rydberg atoms in the process of decay.)
>
> How can we explain the nature of EM fields in the nearfield region of a
> very small, sharply tuned RLC resonator? Say that it's being driven by the
> Casmir background, and so cannot radiate.  But that doesn't mean it lacks
> strong fields in the nearfield region.
>
> The danger is that we'd note the lack of real photons being emitted by an
> atom's electron cloud, conclude that no AC fields exist in the nearfield
> region, therefore assume no significant EM interactions exist between two
> distant atoms.  But transformers and capacitors are fundamentally
> different than pairs of distant radio antennas, and they work fine at
> frequencies with waves too long to radiate.  The lack of "light photons"
> does not imply a lack of strong coupling between two nearby coils.
> (Transformers and capacitors function entirely by tunneling photons, of
> course.)
>
>> These orbitals are actually what cause the transmission spectrums, the
>> transmission spectra is based on an electron absorbing energy,
>
> If I try to boil down all the weird ideas that popped into my head, then
> here's the real question:  do atoms experience significant Vanderwaals
> forces with nearby atoms of the same species, but not with atoms of
> different species?  (Nearby, as in 50 nanometers, not molecular bond
> lengths.)
Well, vanderwall includes so called London Forces, yes?  I was under
the impression that those occured between dissimilar atoms, for
example, the london forces in water that cause its high viscosity and
surface tension occure between O in one atom and H in another.

But then, there are many forces included as vanderwall, yes?  Is there
a particular one you are thinking of that I could hunt down and look
more at?


> The only experiments I've encountered are the very recent ones involving
> an AFM tip separated from a surface by many nanometers.  The tip
> experiences a large unexplained friction, but only if the tip carries a
> tiny crystal of the same material of which the nearby surface is composed.
> In other words, an atom isn't attracted to a similar surface, but instead
> it causes the surface atoms to emit phonons into the crystal lattice
> whenever the single atom tries to move nearby.  The single atom behaves as
> if it's trapped in electromagnetic flypaper.  And the single atom is far
> far outside the atomic diameters of the surface atoms.
I will have to hunt that one down as well.  Very cool.

> Knowing that there's something weird going on in the tens-nM atomic
> region, I'd been waiting for such an experiment to crop up.  I saw that QM
> is still incomplete, because people think that atoms are fundamentally
> different than tiny metal antennas.  On the other hand, this topic isn't
> outside of physics.  Instead it's filed under "VanderWaals interaction,"
> little understood, little s

Re: Great biological mystery force Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 8:44 AM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> leaking pen wrote:
>
> Something to remember. electrons don't actually orbit the nucleus.
> they bounce around randomly, perhaps actually appearing and
> dissapearing, or, tunneling, within vague cloud like areas known as
> orbitals (because of the old Neils Bohr orbital model of the atom. )
>
> Perhaps the nucleus is a toroid and the electrons go through the hole in the
> center.
>

That would be the f orbital.
http://www.chemistry.ucsc.edu/~soliver/151A/Handouts/d-orbitals.gif

>> When electrons are "shared" in a chemical bond, they bounce back and
>> forth between the filled orbitals of the paired atoms, spending
>> weekends with daddy and weeks with mommy (mommy being the most
>> electronegative of the pair, if they arent the same atom)  Now, this
>> fact, based on the distances involved in chemical bonds, means that
>>
>>
>
> what a classic Generation X analogy!
>
Considering that the parents who actually have such a setup are
generally boomers with their gen x kids, I figured it would be as
classic an analogy for the generation that actually HAD such a high
number of divorces and split up kids.  But hey, whatever floats your
boat.

>> but it might be.  (Favorite chem teacher ever.  Was not afraid to say,
>> I don't know. )
>>
>
> wonderful teacher
>
>> might that form of electron tunneling be your radio signal?  jumping
>> to orbitals that are the exact same energy, because its the same
>> element at the same energy state?
>>
>
> Why not, radio waves are electromagnetic radiation, ditto for light. .
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: Great biological mystery force Re: [Vo]:GATC and ESP

[leaking pen]

http://tinyurl.com/mqpszt

has some info on london forces and their effect on boiling temp.

heres some thougts on similar materials and weights and mp and bp.

http://cost.georgiasouthern.edu/chemistry/general/molecule/forces.htm

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 4:05 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> > If I try to boil down all the weird ideas that popped into my head, then
>> > here's the real question:  do atoms experience significant Vanderwaals
>> > forces with nearby atoms of the same species, but not with atoms of
>> > different species?  (Nearby, as in 50 nanometers, not molecular bond
>> > lengths.)
>>
>> Well, vanderwall includes so called London Forces, yes?  I was under
>> the impression that those occured between dissimilar atoms, for
>> example, the london forces in water that cause its high viscosity and
>> surface tension occure between O in one atom and H in another.
>
> Right, I've been labeling London force as "VanderWaals."
>
> So basically I'm asking whether the London force is stronger between atoms
> which have matched absorption lines.  The simple example would be two
> large-N atoms of the same element having many matched lines, though I
> recall that mercury and O2 has a match.
>
> Hmmm, now that you say the above, isn't the temperature of liquid Argon,
> Neon, etc. determined by the London force?  Mix liquid argon with neon in
> 1:1 mixture, so they start keeping each other apart, and see if the
> boiling point gets weird.  But if the force is strong over great
> distances, then maybe we'd see little effect.  How about vapor pressure
> over a liquid argon surface.  If there was attraction, then perhaps in a
> vacuum chamber the argon pressure within 10nM of the liquid argon surface
> would be inexplicably high, or perhaps the condensation rate seen during
> transients in vapor pressure would be higher than that predicted purely
> from first principles, thermo stats.
>
>
> Here's one possible ref:
>
>   Search keywords:  Volokitin Persson
>   Non-contact friction enhanced by resonant atoms
>   http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/652-3.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Seriously, things not given high importance always seem to be where
>> the breakthroughs and answers come from, dont they?
>
> Yeah, Vanderwaals force always seemed intriguing, only because everybody
> else is only fascinated by things like numerical solution of covalent bond
> physics.
>
>> > field must be radial and entirely contained inside the orbital?  Well,
>> > what happens if experiments show otherwise.  And also, what happens if
>> > another hydrogen atom is passing by at 30nM distance?
>>
>> My only question is how this tunneling creates an attraction.   Is the
>> electron actually imparting a force moving the atoms closer together
>> while doing it?
>
> Photon tunneling is also called "magnetic field" and "electric field."
> How could tiny electric dipoles attract each other?   Whether DC fields,
> or AC fields at the same frequency, I think the math is identical.  But
> now add a ferroelectric environment: liquid environment of water dipoles.
> One might imagine that the ferroelectric liquid would behave as a shield.
> But perhaps at short length scales it doesn't?
>
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep

[leaking pen]

on the uberman sleep schedule... im confused...

After moving a couple years ago, i had a LOT of laundry to do.  to get
through it all, i spent 3 days setting my alarm clock at roughly hour
intervals.  get up with the alarm, change dryer and washer loads, fold
clothes, back to sleep for an hour.  I got about 6 actual hours of
sleep a night, and fantastic sleep.  Why spread it through the day?
why not just artificially "reset" your sleep schedule by waking up for
10 to 15 ever 40 minutes or so?

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 3:30 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
>> > People in the "uberman/polyphasic sleep" community think it's a learnable
>> > behavior.  Perhaps it helps to start out with unusual brain chemistry!
>> >
>> Really?  I should look them up.
>
> Search for blogs,  uberman or polyphasic keyword.
>
> Various people have managed to trigger the Uberman sleep mode.  I did it
> accidentally while working on huge software deadlines.  It lasts at least
> for weeks, once you get into it.  You could go and work for three
> employers, if they were jobs that allowed ten-minute naps every few hours.
> Be like Tesla, coming home at 6AM to go to work on personal projects, then
> get back to Edison's company at 10AM for a full day of normal work.  (But
> did Tesla's sleep habits cause his hallucinatory and photographic memory
> experiences, or the reverse?)
>
>> If its causing my blood sugar issues and falling asleep at work, id
>> almost be willing to do something to change the  no no i wouldnt.
>
> That's exactly it: if you're trapped in polyphasic sleep, then you're
> hypersensitive to bread/pasta/rice/potatoes and anything full of corn
> syrup, such as spaghetti sauce.  Normal food screws you up.  Or more
> crackpotty: you have to eat living things, or meat that was cooked minutes
> ago, no leftovers (though oddly, smoked meat seems to work.) I was forced,
> FORCED I tell you, to survive entirely on nuts, artisan beer, and fresh
> salmon and herbs w/asparagus, cooked in the microwave at work.   Also I
> found that I needed larger amounts of zinc, so started taking supplements.
> Some brands didn't work though.
>
>> letting the road itself dictate things, i get openings when i need
>> them to change lanes just appearing before me, my lights are always
>> green, and people pull out of parking spots right in front of me the
>> moment i enter the lot.
>
> Ah, that's exactly the "Jedi Master" effect.  If you're in polyphasic
> sleep, it's as if the gods are watching you, and doling out anomalous
> synchronicity rewards and punishment based on your petty acts of self-
> importance verus saintliness.  Well, more probably your subconscious is
> awake and watching your tiny conscious personality, and giving it ethical
> lessons.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep

[leaking pen]

I have a saying that a lot of friends have made an axiom, actually.
First said it when i was 12.

I think you have to be insane, to not be insane.  See, being a LITTLE
insane is good, as anyone who is COMPLETELY sane in this world will
soon be driven COMPLETELY INsane.

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> When I do this, I find the REM extremely bizarre.  It also takes me a
> good 10 minutes to come "out of it".
>
> I must admit, however, that I find my creativity enhanced with the
> half hour REMs during the hourly cat naps.
>
> Maybe it's the frequent insanity which avoids permanent insanity.  :-)
>
> Terry
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 8:07 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>>
>>> on the uberman sleep schedule... im confused...
>>
>> Different groups seem to worship different schedules.
>>
>> As for me, I found that I'd be happily working away, when suddenly I'd
>> "hit a wall."  I'd have to crawl off to collapse somewhere for a few
>> minutes REM sleep.  But then it would pass, and I'd leap up and go strong
>> for several more hours.  A fast-cycling biological clock, no theories,
>> just empirical.  And once this phenomenon grabbed me, it continued without
>> further effort.  However, to switch back to 8hr nightly sleep, *huge*
>> effort was needed.  (In a different situation we might say "insomnia is no
>> joke.")
>>
>> I also found what NOT to do:  if I kept working through the haze, I'd wake
>> up again, and could continue for hours.  But the missed naps had bad
>> effects, both healthwise and for avoiding something resembling
>> schitzophrenia.  So I learned to take the onset of groggyness very
>> seriously, and not skip any naps, even if I was supposed to be in a
>> work meeting, etc.
>>
>>
>>> After moving a couple years ago, i had a LOT of laundry to do.  to get
>>> through it all, i spent 3 days setting my alarm clock at roughly hour
>>> intervals.  get up with the alarm, change dryer and washer loads, fold
>>> clothes, back to sleep for an hour.  I got about 6 actual hours of
>>> sleep a night, and fantastic sleep.  Why spread it through the day?
>>> why not just artificially "reset" your sleep schedule by waking up for
>>> 10 to 15 ever 40 minutes or so?
>>
>> Once you get into that mode, you start sleeping and waking naturally with
>> no alarm clocks.   But sleeps might be 10-30 minutes long, with several
>> waking hours between.   And when sleep time arrives, there's no mistaking
>> it, it's like drinking a large glass of vodka.
>>
>>
>> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
>> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
>> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
>> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
>> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep

[leaking pen]

That makes sense.  Actually, hunh.  like cats and most other hunting animals.

I wonder what type of sleep schedule our primitive ancestors had.

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:07 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> on the uberman sleep schedule... im confused...
>
> Different groups seem to worship different schedules.
>
> As for me, I found that I'd be happily working away, when suddenly I'd
> "hit a wall."  I'd have to crawl off to collapse somewhere for a few
> minutes REM sleep.  But then it would pass, and I'd leap up and go strong
> for several more hours.  A fast-cycling biological clock, no theories,
> just empirical.  And once this phenomenon grabbed me, it continued without
> further effort.  However, to switch back to 8hr nightly sleep, *huge*
> effort was needed.  (In a different situation we might say "insomnia is no
> joke.")
>
> I also found what NOT to do:  if I kept working through the haze, I'd wake
> up again, and could continue for hours.  But the missed naps had bad
> effects, both healthwise and for avoiding something resembling
> schitzophrenia.  So I learned to take the onset of groggyness very
> seriously, and not skip any naps, even if I was supposed to be in a
> work meeting, etc.
>
>
>> After moving a couple years ago, i had a LOT of laundry to do.  to get
>> through it all, i spent 3 days setting my alarm clock at roughly hour
>> intervals.  get up with the alarm, change dryer and washer loads, fold
>> clothes, back to sleep for an hour.  I got about 6 actual hours of
>> sleep a night, and fantastic sleep.  Why spread it through the day?
>> why not just artificially "reset" your sleep schedule by waking up for
>> 10 to 15 ever 40 minutes or so?
>
> Once you get into that mode, you start sleeping and waking naturally with
> no alarm clocks.   But sleeps might be 10-30 minutes long, with several
> waking hours between.   And when sleep time arrives, there's no mistaking
> it, it's like drinking a large glass of vodka.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep

[leaking pen]

That was unfair, mean spirited, and does not belong in this conversation.
Alex

2009/5/31 Mark Iverson :
> "I wonder what type of sleep schedule our primitive ancestors had."
>
> Ask grok...
>
> -Mark
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: leaking pen [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 7:11 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep
>
> That makes sense.  Actually, hunh.  like cats and most other hunting animals.
>
> I wonder what type of sleep schedule our primitive ancestors had.
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:07 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>>
>>> on the uberman sleep schedule... im confused...
>>
>> Different groups seem to worship different schedules.
>>
>> As for me, I found that I'd be happily working away, when suddenly I'd
>> "hit a wall."  I'd have to crawl off to collapse somewhere for a few
>> minutes REM sleep.  But then it would pass, and I'd leap up and go
>> strong for several more hours.  A fast-cycling biological clock, no
>> theories, just empirical.  And once this phenomenon grabbed me, it
>> continued without further effort.  However, to switch back to 8hr
>> nightly sleep, *huge* effort was needed.  (In a different situation we
>> might say "insomnia is no
>> joke.")
>>
>> I also found what NOT to do:  if I kept working through the haze, I'd
>> wake up again, and could continue for hours.  But the missed naps had
>> bad effects, both healthwise and for avoiding something resembling
>> schitzophrenia.  So I learned to take the onset of groggyness very
>> seriously, and not skip any naps, even if I was supposed to be in a
>> work meeting, etc.
>>
>>
>>> After moving a couple years ago, i had a LOT of laundry to do.  to
>>> get through it all, i spent 3 days setting my alarm clock at roughly
>>> hour intervals.  get up with the alarm, change dryer and washer
>>> loads, fold clothes, back to sleep for an hour.  I got about 6 actual
>>> hours of sleep a night, and fantastic sleep.  Why spread it through the day?
>>> why not just artificially "reset" your sleep schedule by waking up
>>> for 10 to 15 ever 40 minutes or so?
>>
>> Once you get into that mode, you start sleeping and waking naturally with
>> no alarm clocks.   But sleeps might be 10-30 minutes long, with several
>> waking hours between.   And when sleep time arrives, there's no mistaking
>> it, it's like drinking a large glass of vodka.
>>
>>
>> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
>> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
>> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
>> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
>> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Need big list of legit heretical research

[leaking pen]

Remote Viewing Secrets: A Handbook (Paperback)
by Joseph McMoneagle

assuming that there is no gov funding currently.  I could be wrong.

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:57 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
> Gerald Pollack, a sucessful maverick biochemist at the UW, is trying to
> collect a list of books which describe crazy fringe research projects and
> proposals not currently attracting any government funding.  My own list is
> below.  Any more suggestions?  Book suggestions, NOT research proposals.
> Also, collections of taboo topics are desired over books about
> individuals.
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
> beaty chem washington edu   Research Engineer
> billbamascicom  UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
> 206-543-6195Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
>
>
> THE SOURCEBOOK PROJECT: FRONTIERS OF SCIENCE Compiled by WR Corliss
>
> INFINITE ENERGY MAGAZINE
>
> THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE Dr. Dean Radin
>
> FORBIDDEN ARCHEOLOGY  Michael Cremo
>
> SEVEN EXPERIMENTS THAT COULD CHANGE THE WORLD, A do-it yourself guide to
> revolutionary science,  Rupert Sheldrake
>
> FORBIDDEN SCIENCE, Suppressed research that could change our lives
> Richard Milton
>
> SCIENTIFIC LITERACY AND THE MYTH OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD Henry H. Bauer
>
> DEVIANT SCIENCE The Case of Parapsychology,  James McClenon
>
> DARWIN'S CREATION MYTH, by Alexander Mebane
>
> COSMIC PLASMAS, by Hannes Aflven
>
> THE ELECTRIC UNIVERSE Thornhill & Talbott
>
> DARK LIFE  Michael Taylor
>
> THE DEEP HOT BIOSPHERE  Thomas Gold
>
> THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF IGNORANCE Ronald Duncan, Miranda Weston-Smith eds.
>
>
> Also, any tales of vindicated heretics?
>
>  HIDDEN HISTORIES OF SCIENCE R. Silvers, ed. 1995
>
>  CONFRONTING THE EXPERTS, B. Martin, ed., 1996
>
>  THE ART OF SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION, W. Beveridge 1950
>
>  SCIENCE IS A SACRED COW, Anthony Standen 1950
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Need big list of legit heretical research

[leaking pen]

pretty close to my own feelings on the matter, hence why i said im not
sure if they CURRENTLY recieve funding.

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:58 AM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> From Lawrence:
>
>> There used to be US gov't funding some years ago, but it was
>> discontinued.
>>
>> The fact that it received such funding is being used to bolster current
>> claims to credibility.
>
> My theory is that funding continues on RV, just that it was
> intentionally driven even deeper into black ops. I recall there was a
> big bru-ha-ha in congress about how absurd it was that our government
> was caught red-handed spending precious taxpayer's money on boondoggle
> programs... and of course a RV program was a perfect target to go
> after... a symbol of wasted taxpayer money. At the end of the day
> various congressional leaders and senators could pat and self
> congratulate themselves and tell their constituents that they had
> saved their country money, so please go ahead and re-elect me again
> for looking out for your best tax dollar interests.
>
> I suspect much of that publicity may have been carefully managed - in
> the sense that those who were running RV programs may have decided
> that what they were doing was getting a little to visible as far as
> they were concerned. It was time to drive RV programs deeper under
> cover. I suspect they got their way.
>
> I bet it's business as usual. ;-)
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Inventors and Uberman/polyphasic sleep

[leaking pen]

So, first off, anyone have any good plans for a home made eeg?  im
interested in taking a closer look at my own sleep schedule.

Based on all the conversation, I've decided to try a slightly modified
uberman, to see if it fixes my issues.

So, 45 minute nap at 5 yesterday, again at 10, slept from 2 to 5:15,
45 minute nap on the bus from 6 to 645.  plan on a nap at noon, but so
far, not that tired, with very little sleep.  im liking this.  now, to
see what my body thinks, even if the mind is happy.

The more I think about it, the more i agree, its hunter gatherer versus farmer.

the hunter/gatherer is always active, always moving.  being able to
catnap constantly, like, well, a cat, was very desirable.
the farmer is in one place, generally works the fields while the sun
is out, has nothing to do after sun down with a lack of light. has a
safe location where you dont have to worry about predators and moving
every so often, so sleeping in a straight chunk works better to let
you stay awake all day working.

So... narcoleptics...  genetic throwbacks?



On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 8:09 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> I wonder what type of sleep schedule our primitive ancestors had.
>
> While in accelerated mode I wondered about this, and "saw" the answer in
> some detail.  Are fever-dreams trustworthy?
>
> In "town" mode everybody crawls into their wigwams and sleeps at night, so
> the society remains synched up.  In "individual hunter"  mode you might
> chase down large game for hours, catnapping, even without shooting it,
> until it gives up.  (Impressive big hunter drives it in a wide circle, so
> it finally walks into the villiage and collapses.)  In "being hunted down
> by invaders" mode, the ones who sleep more will fall behind: a large
> natural selection force.  If some humans needed 8hrs sleep, then a mutant
> "sleepless" tribe could always run them into the ground like large game.
> Our ancestors are the ones whose bodies/minds figured out the solution.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))
> William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com                         http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Need big list of legit heretical research

[leaking pen]

When you gaze at Tesla, Tesla gazes back at you!

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 2:21 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> Remote Viewing Secrets: A Handbook (Paperback)
>> by Joseph McMoneagle
>>
>> assuming that there is no gov funding currently.  I could be wrong.
>
> There's an idea:  just lie down, close your eyes, and look at Colorado
> Springs lab in 1899.  H.  Big bright square lights on the walls
> instead of on the ceiling.  Tables all over the place.  Weird repeating
> sound.  Oh.  Holy.  Crap.  No wonder Tesla kept secrets, and went slowly
> insane.  And now it's going to happen to me too, damn.  On second thought,
> DON'T GO AND LOOK.
>
> :)
>
>
>
> (( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))
> William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com                         http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818    unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Need big list of legit heretical research

[leaking pen]

Taking the source as potentially genuine, first off, especially as a
barn, hed have to put in a drop ceiling, which wasnt done then. plus,
Tesla never really seemed to thing of things above coming down, but
things below going up.

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 6:41 z PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>
>> When you gaze at Tesla, Tesla gazes back at you!
>
> He's Cthulu, a Deep One, and is waiting just over the edge to tell you
> secrets that no sane mind can tolerate!
>
> But why would you want to put big square fluorescent fixtures on the walls
> of your lab, instead of the ceiling?  That was unexpected.  I guess they
> aren't nearly as bright as ours.  Makes the interior of the barn appear to
> have big bright rectangular "picture windows," but with no scenery outside
> them.  Perhaps in 1899, ceiling fixtures weren't the standardized norm
> like they are today.  Or perhaps it was easier to work on them if they
> were at window height? Or maybe the whole experience was inaccurate
> hallucination. (Also, all the stuff in the barn was in color.  I expected
> it to be in monochrome, like all the photos.  Lots of small bright
> red-painted coils sitting around on tables.)
>
>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 2:21 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>> > On Sun, 31 May 2009, leaking pen wrote:
>> >
>> >> Remote Viewing Secrets: A Handbook (Paperback)
>> >> by Joseph McMoneagle
>> >>
>> >> assuming that there is no gov funding currently.  I could be wrong.
>> >
>> > There's an idea:  just lie down, close your eyes, and look at Colorado
>> > Springs lab in 1899.  H.  Big bright square lights on the walls
>> > instead of on the ceiling.  Tables all over the place.  Weird repeating
>> > sound.  Oh.  Holy.  Crap.  No wonder Tesla kept secrets, and went slowly
>> > insane.  And now it's going to happen to me too, damn.  On second thought,
>> > DON'T GO AND LOOK.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture

[leaking pen]

Well, this is a science forum, so lets test that. And we will do so in
true science fashion, by attempting to DISprove our theory.
So, our theory is that co2 is NOT a pollutant.

To test that, hows about we lock you in a room and pump in co2? see
what it does

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> Repeat after me 100 times:  CO2 is not a pollutant.  CO2 is not a
> pollutant.  CO2 is not a pollutant.  CO2 is not a pollutant.  CO2 is not a

>
>
>
>
> If we have to capture the carbon in CO2, then we really can’t burn it in the
> first place.
>
>
>
> Funny how we are willing to build Nuclear plants for other countries, but we
> are going to stick ourselves with windmills and solar collectors.  Half of
> Iran is sun baked desert, but even they won’t take solar power over nuclear.
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:11 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture
>
>
>
> My first day in the carbon-sequestering group went well.  The technology is
> proprietary so I cannot share it with this group.  I can, however, share
> some items.  In the year 2020 all power plants will be required to sequester
> their carbon emissions.  They will be required to capture 90% of the emitted
> carbon.  There are many technologies to capture carbon.  The ones that can
> capture carbon at a 90% rate are very capital and energy intensive.  Capital
> costs could equal the cost of the original generating plant.  Energy costs
> could reach 30% of generation.  Efforts are underway to reduce these costs.
> There does not appear to be an easy way out.  The company I work for has the
> only working, in operation, technology in North America.  That's good.
>
>
>
> I do not know how the utilities and rate payers are going to be able to
> sustain these costs.  Perhaps a goal of 25% capture would be more viable.
>
>
>
> I am still learning and studying this stuff.  Jed we need cold fusion now
> please.
>
>
>
> Frank Z
>
>
>
> 
>
> An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!

Re: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture

[leaking pen]

Balance?  Science is not political.  Reality and facts do NOT bend to
political bias.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> I must have heard over a hundred times in the past year that CO2 is a
> pollutant.  I thought we could use a little balance.
>
> Jeff
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:13 AM
> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture
>
> Jeff Fink wrote:
>
>>Repeat after me 100 times:  CO2 is not a pollutant.  CO2 is not a
>>pollutant.  CO2 is not a pollutant.
>
> Of course it is a pollutant! That is an absurd assertion. Excessive
> CO2 causes harm, and it is injected into the atmosphere by people,
> therefore it is a pollutant.
>
> Any substance is a pollutant in some circumstances and in some
> amounts, but not in other circumstances or concentrations. Take salt,
> for example. Two-thirds of the earth is covered by salt water, and we
> cannot survive without eating salt, so it is obviously not a
> pollutant in the ocean or in your body. However, if you plow salt
> into a productive field in a farm, the way the Romans supposedly did
> in Carthage, it permanently destroys the land. If you spread salt
> over roads in the U.S. to melt snow, it causes terrific damage to the
> surroundings. Therefore it is a pollutant.
>
> Please do not replace scientific analysis with empty slogans.
> Repeating simplistic, mindless nonsense 100 times does not make it
> true. This is a science discussion forum, so let us have rigor.
>
>
>>If we have to capture the carbon in CO2, then we really can't burn
>>it in the first place.
>
> We can burn it. It is possible to burn it and capture the CO2. But it
> will probably not be cost-effective. Also, this reduces atmospheric
> oxygen which is a growing problem.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture

[leaking pen]

as well as a method of suicide, combined with carbon MONoxide for a
more nerve deadening effect, vis a vis the old, run the car in an
enclosed garage and go to sleep method.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>> Jeff Fink wrote:
>>
>>> If you put me in a room where CO2 is double the ambient, I won't even
>>> notice.
>>
>> Oh come now! This is not a serious argument. If I put you in a Japanese
>> hot spring bath for a half-hour you would probably find it pleasant. If
>> a million acres of Georgia land were inundated with 50 deg C water
>> filled with sulphur it would be a disaster.
>>
>> Please, give us a break. This is a science forum. You can't just toss
>> out the last hundred years of climatology and substitute a statement
>> about how you would fare if you were put in a room with a lot of CO2.
>
> The argument (or non-argument) also depends critically on the definition
> of "a lot" of CO2.
>
> Note well that CO2 can be used as an anesthetic in small animal surgery
> (it knocks them cold) and it is also used to perform euthanasia on small
> animals (it knocks them colder).  Again, it all depends on the
> concentration.
>
>
>> That's got nothing remotely to do with climatology, and you know it.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Sequestering CO2

[leaking pen]

Actually, biosphere 2 experiments with raising trees found that in
higher co2 environments, they would grow quick and tall, not as wide,
not sequester as much co2, and while they used more co2 in
respiration, at levels about double our current baseline co2
percentages, the difference between co2 produced and consumed by trees
neared 0.

Again, SCIENCE!

Alex
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> We have economical examples of these devices all over the planet.  They are
> called trees.  They are self replicating, and the higher the concentration
> of CO2 gets the faster they replicate.  Well, isn't that cool?  A self
> regulating planet wide system is already in place to deal with the problem.
>
> Jeff
>
> -Original Message-
> From: OrionWorks [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 2:09 PM
> To: vortex-l
> Subject: [Vo]:Sequestering CO2
>
> Frank's work brings up a wish-list:
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if there was an economical technology in existence
> that had the ability to separate CO2 back into its individual
> elements. Release the oxygen back into the atmosphere while
> simultaneously nano-manufacturing all sorts of interesting carbon
> nonotubes.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for some balance?

[leaking pen]

Im not too familiar with some of the mathematic principles mentioned,
but i did find this

First, he mis-applies the Virial theorem. The virial
theorem applies to kinetic vs. potential energy, and it can be shown
that for an atmosphere in equilibrium it is trivially satisfied by
any hydrostically balanced atmosphere. The second error is that he
misapplies Kirchoff's laws --in fact the so-called application of
these laws bears no relation to the actual statement of the laws.
Both of these errors are in the first 9 pages. You can spot the error
in the virial theorem because the dimensions aren't right -- he applies
the theorem to energy fluxes, rather than energy, and his result is
just a fiction.


as a comment on the paper.  perhaps others here can make more sense of it.

as for changing albedo... you mean, through increased city building,
melting and spreading of the oceans, and deforestation?  the albedo of
the earth is indeed changing.

2009/6/3 Mark Iverson :
> Or has the balance always been there?
>
> Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi has quite a distinguished scientific career, including a 
> number of years at
> NASA Langley.
>
> It's a long read, but well worth it...
>
> http://hpsregi.elte.hu/zagoni/NEW/ZM-MF_short.pdf
>
> And here is one of his later peer-reviewed publications:
> http://hpsregi.elte.hu/zagoni/NEW/2007.pdf
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
> Dr. Miskolczi's theses:
>
> 1.There are hitherto unrealized global average relationships 
> between certain
> longwave flux components in the Earth’s atmosphere;
>
> 2.The new relations directly link global mean surface 
> temperature to the incoming
> shortwave radiation F0 ;
>
> 3.The Earth’s atmosphere optimally utilizes all available 
> incoming energy; its
> greenhouse effect works on the possible energetic top;
>
> 4.The classical semi-infinite solution of the Earth's 
> atmospheric radiative transfer
> problem does not contain the correct boundary conditions; it underestimates 
> the global average
> near-surface air temperatures and overestimates the ground temperatures;
>
> 5.Recent models significantly overestimate the sensitivity of 
> greenhouse forcing to
> optical depth perturbations;
>
> 6.Resolving the paradox of temperature discontinuity at the 
> ground, a new energy
> balance constraint can be recognized;
>
> 7.The Earth’s atmosphere, satisfying the energy minimum 
> principle, is configured to
> the most effective cooling of the planet with an equilibrium global average 
> vertical temperature and
> moisture profile;
>
> 8.The Earth-atmosphere system maintains a virtually saturated 
> greenhouse effect with
> a critical equilibrium global average IR flux optical depth tauA = 1.87;  
> excess or deficit in this
> global average optical depth violates fundamental energetic principles;
>
> 9.As long as the Earth has the oceans as practically infinite 
> natural sources and
> sinks of optical depth in the form of water vapor, the system is able to 
> maintain this critical
> optical depth and the corresponding stable global mean surface temperature;
>
> 10.   The new transfer and greenhouse functions, based on the finite, 
> semi-transparent
> solution of the Schwarzschild-Milne equation with real boundary conditions 
> adequately reproduce both
> the Earth’s and the Martian atmospheric greenhouse effect;
>
> 11.   The Kiehl-Trenberth 1997 global mean energy budget estimate 
> (c.f. IPCC 2007 AR4 WG1
> FAQ1.1. Fig.1.) is erroneous; the U.S. Standard Atmosphere (USST-76) does not 
> represent the real
> global average temperature profile (not in radiative equilibrium, not in 
> energy balance, not enough
> H2O); it should not be used as a single-column model for global energy budget 
> studies;
>
> 12.   The observed global warming on the Earth has nothing directly 
> to do with changes in
> atmospheric IR absorber concentrations; it must be related to variations in 
> the total available
> incoming F0 solar plus P0 heat energy (geothermal, ocean-atmosphere heat 
> exchange, industrial heat
> generation etc.). Runaway greenhouse effect contradicts the energy 
> conservation principle; global
> mean surface warming is possible only if the solar luminosity, the Earth-Sun 
> distance and/or the
> planetary albedo changes (depending on the extent of the cryosphere, on cloud 
> coverage, and/or on
> the varying surface properties according to land use change etc.);
>
> 13.   Without water vapor feedback, the primary greenhouse 
> sensitivity to a doubling CO2
> theoretically would be about 0.24 K, according to the semi-transparent 
> solution of the radiation
> equations in a bounded atmosphere. But taking into account all the energetic 
> constraints, the actual
> value is 0.0 K.
>
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Datab

Re: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture

[leaking pen]

Hum, it's almost summer here in the great northwest, why am I wearing
this sweater? Oh yes, that's why they call it climate change.


and here in arizona , we hit 9 days of over 100 in a row sooner than
ever in recorded history.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:14 PM, thomas malloy  wrote:
> Rick Monteverde wrote:
>
>> Jed wrote:
>>
 If you would like to argue that salt or CO2 in the wrong places in the

>> wrong amounts are not pollutants, let's see some reasons.
>
> Hum, I assume the plan is to bury the NH3 (CO2)2. I wonder what happens when
> it gets hot?
>
>>
>> Wait a minute!
>> - Anthropogenic contributions of CO2 to the atmosphere is warming earth's
>> climate (and we're at the "tipping point"
>
> Hum, it's almost summer here in the great northwest, why am I wearing this
> sweater? Oh yes, that's why they call it climate change.
>
>> In your version of a science forum, then
>> tell us if we can't show evidence that it isn't true, we should basically
>> just shut up and smell the socialism?
>
> Ah, the voice of discent!
>
>>
>> Ok, I'll play:
>>
>> - Invisible elves from the Crab Nebula in Orion are controlling the
>> Federal
>> Reserve Bank from their base on the back side of the moon.
>>
> Wrong! There not invisible, haven't you seen the pictures of the "Grey
> Aliens"?
>
>> And that explains
>> everything that's happened to the US economy lately, as confirmed by
>> numerous people who have studied these things carefully and can't possibly
>> be wrong.
>>
>> There it is. Hmpf.
>
> I've  just been informed that the money spent so far would have given every
> American $500,000 . Which is one hell of a lot of money, I wonder where it
> all went?
>
>
>
> --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
> http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for some balance?

[leaking pen]

i am in agreement partially.  since it included substance, it was
simply an insult, as it was not the basis of his arguement.


On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Rick Monteverde  wrote:
> The message, despite the link, was clearly ad-hominem.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 10:13 AM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for
>> some balance?
>
>>
>> The page in question was actually directed at his message,
>> not the messenger, despite the title.  There was no ad
>> hominem involved at all.
>>
>> Anyone unclear on this should go read the page to which Nick
>> posted the link, which directly addresses Miskolczi's
>> arguments regarding global warming.  Nothing at all that I
>> saw on that page attacked Mizkolczi, the man.
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:optical trap for FQ (Feline Quanta)

[leaking pen]

::Falls over laughing:

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:39 AM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
> We recently constructed the first "cat optical trap," a longwave
> incoherent 1-D version of the laser cooled adiabatic ion trap.
>
> Obtain a long spring-arm desklamp, lift it 10" high and aim its emitter
> downwards, and place a bath towel just below it (cellulose preferred over
> artificial fibers, aged fabric required.)  Apply power, and after a brief
> delay the space between the incoherent source and the cellulose absorber
> will fill with large purring entities extracted from the Dirac background.
> Remove power, and their number decays far more slowly than the time-
> constant associated with their appearance, perhaps giving evidence of a
> short-range attraction force.  On successive operations the time constant
> of population growth diminishes to a limit: a strange form of hysteresis.
>
> Chaotic feline trajectories are observed in multi-particle populations in
> the trap, analogous to those of ion crystals during optical trapping in
> vacuum conditions.  We see evidence that our trap was accidentally
> optimized for 720T and 1G acceleration field, but further testing has yet
> to be performed.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture

[leaking pen]

nor did i ever state that double co2 would do it.  i suggested simply
turning up the co2 to higher and higher concentrations, you know, just
until you stopped breathing!

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Jeff Fink  wrote:
> A clarification:
>
> I was responding to Leaking pen, when he challenged me to survive in a room
> full of CO2 as proof that CO2 is not pollutant.  To that I responded that
> even at twice ambient atmospheric levels of CO2, I would not even notice.
> In a subsequent post I backed up my response with some data.
>
> I did not say, nor intend to speculate what effects double CO2 levels would
> have on climate.  But, since Jed interpreted my response to Leaking Pen as a
> comment on CO2 levels verses global warming, I will go on record with the
> following statement:
>
> I suspect that doubling atmospheric CO2 levels would have some measurable
> effect on climate.
>
> Jeff
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 4:21 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:first day in carbon capture
>
> Rick Monteverde wrote:
>
>>The assertion made by
>> > Fink -- that high
>> > CO2 levels do not affect human respiration therefore the
>> > global warming hypothesis must be wrong -- is not supported
>> > by data or theory. . . .
>>
>>[Fink] may be incorrect, but it is not nonsense. It is supported by some
>>data and some theory.
>
> Okay, what data and theory? Where is it published? What are you
> talking about? I have never heard of anything like that, and Fink did
> not supply the names of papers or references.
>
>
>>The assertion made by [Rothwell] -- that [Fink's claim
>>is wrong and therefore the global warming hypothesis must be right] -- is
>>not supported by data or theory. It is a straw man logical fallacy; he is
>>refuting an argument that no one makes.
>
> My assertion was not a straw man. Fink clearly made the argument that
> there is no danger from global warming as long as CO2 levels do not
> affect human respiration. (To put it another way, he claimed that the
> basis of the global warming hypothesis is rooted in measurements or
> assertions about CO2 affecting human respiration.) That is
> unprecedented and without any scientific basis as far as I know. If
> you know of some foundation for this, Rick, please enlighten us. Or
> if you claim that is not Fink's argument, then what was it?
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:optical trap for FQ (Feline Quanta)

[leaking pen]

ooo, thinking of other things to add to that list just gave me an idea
for a REAL invention

doggy/kitty door with an rfid reader for those pets with chips.  only
your pet can open the door!

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:08 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, OrionWorks wrote:
>> Except for a tendency to pounce on their meals and occasionally hack
>> up a hairball there will be no way to distinguish these futuristic
>> invaders from the human population - until it's too late.
>
> What's wrong with pouncing on meals or hacking up hairballs?  I've been
> doing it for about as long as I've had the idea for this trapping
> experiment.  That, plus my designs for lamp-switch or "television remote
> control" rugs which can be operated by foot pressure.  And the indoor
> aviary to raise finches.  Perhaps long term events associated with this
> experiment extend temporally in both advance and retarded forms, as in
> Feynman/Wheeler.
>
>
> (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
> William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
> Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for some balance?

[leaking pen]

I don't have a refference, i grabbed that from someones post on a
message board, to, as i said, give thought to those who know more
about the subject than i to see if that made sense.

2009/6/5 Mark Iverson :
> Just so you all have an idea of what its all about, first, a summary of the 
> theory and then I'll
> comment on Nick's post:
>
> "The standard theory of anthropogenic global warming is challenged by a new 
> theory which is based on
> empirical evidence and a reevaluation of the Eddinger equations, using a 
> different set of boundary
> conditions. In this exposition the Eddington radiation equilibrium equations 
> (which apply to stars)
> are solved correctly for a planet with a semi-transparent atmosphere, like 
> the Earth. The correct
> solutions predict that Earth's atmosphere holds an amount of greenhouse gases 
> that maximize
> radiation of heat into space. It appears that the Earth has a self-regulation 
> mechanism that allows
> increases of CO2 to exert only a very minor influence on the planet's 
> temperature. Independent
> measurements give insight into the mechanism of how this self-regulation 
> takes place. Still other
> measurements contradict the atmospheric heating that supposedly follows 
> directly from standard
> climate models as a result of increased CO2 during the last few decades. 
> Cooling is observed,
> instead. Due to the importance of the problem for policies that affect the 
> well-being of the world's
> population, we conclude that there are now ample grounds to organize a 
> discussion between the
> scientific proponents of these two theories."
> REF: http://www.landshape.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=introduction
>
>
> Nick:
>
> Your disparaging comment is unconvincing, and misleading; ALL THE FACTS, not 
> just what supports what
> you believe to be true.  I went to your reference (and BTW, I'm still waiting 
> for leaking pen's
> reference!) and did some reading there and at other sites, and it didn't take 
> long to find one
> person's comment about you:
>
> "Nick you are still obfuscating, but thanks for the response anyway.
> "As I said, momentum is a vector, and because it is symmetric about the 
> Earth's axis, for S_T it
> sums to zero anyway."
>
> Ok so how do they do this?  You said,
> "The escaping photons provide an effective force on the earth. These might 
> budge the orbit by a
> nanometre or so"
>
> "You are making it up as you go by the look of it. Now consider a column 
> through which the photons
> of S_T are passing through the atmosphere they have a momentum what happens 
> to that momentum due to
> interaction with the particles in the amosphere on the way out? Try to stay 
> focused on the
> question."
>
> ME: For those that are truly interested in this topic, there is some very 
> good DISCUSSION about Dr.
> Miskolczi's papers on these sites:
>
> http://www.climateaudit.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=556
>
> http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/The_Saturated_Greenhouse_Effect.htm
>
> Here's a bibliography and review of recent peer-reviewed papers which 
> questions Global Warming
> Science:
> http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/files/documents/Madhav%20bibliography%20LONG%20VERSION%20Feb%
> 206-07.pdf
>
>
> ME: And some of this is beginning to sound very (F&P) familiar...
>
> "... Then Miskolczi himself posts a few messages in his defense and he is 
> insulted by Gavin and
> 'raypierre.'
>
> Gavin and 'raypierre' claim that Mikolczi makes several blatant algebraic 
> errors in the first 9
> pages of his report that invalidate his entire thesis. They don't say what 
> those errors are; they
> are apparently saving them for a paper written by a sophomore physics class 
> as a class project. In
> other words, Miklosci's math errors are so obvious that sophomore physics 
> majors can point them out.
>
> Maybe they are right, but that was in March and, as far as I can tell, the 
> "class paper" has not
> been posted yet."
>
> -Mark
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Palmer [mailto:ni...@wynterwood.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:43 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for some balance?
>
> Ferenc Miskolczi - balance? - oh please! Before you now it he will be 
> "proving" his theories using
> the size, relationships and angles of the great pyramids.
>
>  http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi
>
>
> Nick Palmer
>
> On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.53/2154 - Release Date: 06/04/09 
> 05:53:00
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.53/2154 - Release Date: 06/04/09 
> 05:53:00
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Shanahan goes off the deep end! -- The psychology of bigotry

[leaking pen]

this should be on B guys.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:16 AM, OrionWorks wrote:
> From Lawrence de Bivort:
>
>> Some 'substitutes' for racial bigotries come readily to
>> mind: anti-Muslim (from evangelical Christians and current
>> American society); anti-Semitism (eg from the Nazis);
>> anti-Palestinians (from Israelis). Perhaps anti-Liberals?
>
> I have a perfect example of anti-Mulsim hatred disguised as Christian
> piety, retrieved from a private group list that I somehow managed to
> get "included" in. (Don't ask me how this came about!) I actually
> received the following "true" letter twice approximately a year apart,
> so it would seem that my original objections were ignored - or
> overruled.
>
> What absolutely astonished me was the incredible amount of arrogance
> and "scripting" the original author displayed in how he characterized
> the behavior of "the Imam". In just a couple of sentences it is
> alleged that the Christian minister was capable of reducing the Imam's
> religious ideology to shreds. That's one for the Christians, and  zero
> for the Muslims!
>
> For those curious I recommend browsing www.snopes.com, for a run down
> on similar internet rumors, including the source of this viral letter
> that continues to circulate through the internet like a virulent case
> of Swine-flu:
>
> See
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/allah.asp
>
>
> And now, for your entertainment, the so-called Christian letter of
> pious "enlightenment":
>
> -
>
> Allah or Jesus?
>
> Last month I attended my annual training session that's required for
> maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training
> session there was a presentation by three speakers who represented the
> Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths who explained their
> belief systems. I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam
> had to say.
>
> The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam complete
> with a video. After the presentations time was provided for questions
> and answers. When it was my turn I directed my question to the Imam
> and asked: "Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that all
> of the Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy
> war] against the infidels of the world. And, that by killing an
> infidel, which is a command to al Muslims, they are assured of a place
> in heaven. If that's the case, can you give me the definition of an
> infidel?"
>
> There was no disagreement with my statements and without hesitation he
> replied, "non-believers!"
>
> I responded, "so, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers
> of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith
> so they can go to heaven. Is that correct?"
>
> The expression on his face changed from authority and command to that
> of a little boy who had just gotten caught with his hand in the cookie
> jar. He sheepishly replied, "Yes."
>
> I then said, "Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pop
> John Paul command all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Pat
> Robertson, or Dr. Stanley ordering Protestants to do the same in order
> to go to heaven."
>
> The Imam was Speechless.
>
> I continue, "I also have a problem with being your friend when you and
> your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me. Let me ask
> you a question ... would you rather have your Allah who tell[s] you to
> kill me in order to go to heaven or my Jesus who tells me to love you
> because I am going to heaven and wants you to be with me"
>
> You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame.
>
> Chuck Colson once told me something that has sustained me for 20 years
> of prison ministry. He said to me, "Rick, remember that the truth wil
> prevail."
>
> And it will!
>
> -
>
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:anomalous DNA changes

[leaking pen]

okay, codons used are start and stop codons, and codons that cause
certain aminos to be put in place.

how can you tell if another codon is "activated" ?

im one of the supposed "star kids" or "violet children" myself. Had a
couple people try to tell my mom that when i was a kid. Her comments,
no, hes hyper intelligent, extra sensitive to certain things, and very
human and normal thoughout history as people like that happen all the
time.  we just dont burn them as witches anymore (much)

But, the sodium vapor lamp bit is still a great party trick.  in
puberty i had such excellent control i could point at lights nearby
and put out specific ones.  (not sure what causes it, but apparently
overloads of voltage in such lamps cause breakers to pop then come
back on when the light cools.  the theory was that the human body's
normal electrical field, if it matched up just right, could cause it.
who knows why.  But a couple years ago, i lived at a house that had a
few sodiums still on the street behind it.  i would walk that street
and then around and in, about a block out of the way.  my roomate knew
when i was a few minutes from home, because the backyard got dark as
the lamp went out as i walked under it every day. )

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:41 PM, OrionWorks  wrote:
> From Rick Monteverde:
>
>>> Ok... at this point it's time to start asking questions
>>> like: References please?
>>
>> Me too - any references? Wikipedia says it's all crap and
>> there are no scientific studies showing any of this stuff
>> is true. However, doesn't *that* sound familiar! And remember
>> the new-age nonsense claims that red LEDs could accelerate
>> healing? I used to get a good laugh out of that too, until
>> it was proven to be true, published in Nature, and is now
>> accepted therapy for some things.
>
> Do you recall what kind of red LED light healing "therapy" was being
> applied? I would guess it had something to do with the acceleration of
> healing certain skin problems, possibly allergies.
>
> I know from my own experience that I occasionally got little moody
> around the end of January and February way up here in the wilds of
> Wisconsin. I got a recommendation to use a full-spectrum light to
> simulate natural sunlight. Turn it on for an hour or so first thing in
> the morning. Seemed to work. Since I started walking to and from work
> year-round I suspect being exposed to a strong dose of natural
> sunlight on a regular basis had something to do with keeping the SADs
> at bay. Haven't had to use the artificial sun lamp since.
>
>>Tin foil hat that I am, I still would never have
>> seen that coming.
>>
>> So how can claims like this be verified/falsified in this
>> environment? And where do I send my money so I can get my four
>> special codons activated? And if I pony up for the top secret
>> 5th codon, will I be able to levitate?
>>
>> - Rick
>
> Send in 20 Ovaltine boxtops to the codon committee - and all will be
> revealed to you. BTW, levitating is not all that it's cracked up to
> be. Landings can be a bitch! Trust me! ;-)
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

Re: [Vo]:anomalous DNA changes

[leaking pen]

No, ive heard of that one before.  I attract smoke smell, walk through
a smoke filled room really quick, take a shower and smell all the
smoke embedded in my hair and skin coming off. (ugh) .  but i cant
clear a cloud.  im betting its something electrostatic.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Rick Monteverde wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: leaking pen [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 1:33 PM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:anomalous DNA changes
>
> 
>
>> But, the sodium vapor lamp bit is still a great party trick.
>
> 
>
> Can you clear a cloud cigarrett smoke in a room? I think it's a related
> ability.
>
> - Rick
>
>
>