Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 7 Nov 2006 09:56 "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message news:87663$455065eb$4fe724c$5663(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... > Ken Smith wrote: > >> In article <92d5d$45506124$4fe724c$5573(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> >>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >> >> [....] >> >>>>The extremists I think we really need to stop appeasing are the >>>>Religious Right and the Republicans who they are currently leading >>>>around by the nose. Tomorrow's our chance. >>> >>> >>>Perhaps you're talking about the people who have and >>>maintain taditional American values. >> >> >> What traditional American values would these be? There never was a >> golden age. It is a myth we all like to belive but if you look at the >> past you find the horrors of today plus some. >> >> >>>You know, the >>>folks who made America great in the first place! >> >> >> Read up on Franklin. You will find that he and most of the others who >> made America great in the first place would make the religious right >> blanch. > > What you've done this morning in two posts is to disclose > the low esteem in which you hold people. You seem to have > some idea that the base element always prevails. Speaking for myself, not at all. I always hold out the hope that people can rise above their basest instincts of hatred and fear. It's just that every few years, we forget to keep a lookout for these things, and they take over. > The facts are somewhat different. Each human exhibits some > degree of discontinuity in how they conduct their lives. > Franklin did manage to achieve some pretty significant > things, especially for someone whose first calling was > as a tradesman/printer. Uh...that was his point. That, and the fact that Franklin and many of the others who made this country great had no use for your BS about "traditional American values". Eric Lucas
From: Eeyore on 7 Nov 2006 09:56 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Stop. I was talking about a study done in 1969. What has that got to do with 2006 ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 7 Nov 2006 09:58 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message. > >> > >> My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with > >> no checks nor balances. > > > >....and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that has been > >for the entire country. > > You do need to learn about Consitution. There are checks and > balances working. Bush has been busy removing some of them. Graham
From: lucasea on 7 Nov 2006 09:59 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eiprrh$8ss_005(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <pIOdnfrlz6SuidPYnZ2dnUVZ8tadnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eikpng$8qk_005(a)s1014.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <KZa3h.5012$B31.2822(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>"T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message >>>>news:SJqdneZANLpQVNHYnZ2dnUVZ8q-dnZ2d(a)pipex.net... >>>>> >>>>>> It isn't just one or two. It is everyone I listened to plus >>>>>> relatives of in-laws who needed the service. >>>>> >>>>> How many did you listen to? How many relatives? What percentage of the >>>>> total did this reflect? How did you ensure your sample was >>>>> representative >>>>> and not just people with complaints? >>>>> >>>>>> The only ones >>>>>> who thought Canada's medical system was wonderful were those >>>>>> husbands who were very, very sick. >>>>> >>>>> How can you make a claim like this? Did you speak to _every_ one? >>>>> >>>>> You were the first to complain about the data sample methods and >>>>> conclusions in the Lancet report, yet here you seem to be more than >>>>> happy >>>>> to weigh personal anecdote over data. >>>> >>>>Oh, but she's much better at it, >>> >>> I'm not only better at it, but I'm very, very, very good doing this >>> kind of work. >> >>What, making numbers up? > > Analyzing problems on very little data or usually no hard data. > There is valuable information in the kinds of data that is > absent. No, the data are there, in the form of surveys. You just choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 7 Nov 2006 10:00
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eipsta$8qk_001(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <RRH3h.6197$B31.1642(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:ein6vl$8qk_002(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> >>> My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>> no checks nor balances. >> >>....and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that has been >>for the entire country. > > You do need to learn about Consitution. There are checks and > balances working. And the Republicans have been dismantling them one-by-one, all in the name of fear. You could set up a power plant to harness the energy of our founders spinning in their graves right now, and it would light up a large city. Eric Lucas |