Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: mmeron on 8 Oct 2006 14:41 In article <egaims$8qk_001(a)s779.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >In article <GWTVg.69$45.157(a)news.uchicago.edu>, > mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>In article <eg827f$8qk_004(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>In article <5dfVg.62$45.46(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >>> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>In article <eg2paa$8qk_011(a)s829.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>>In article <PsRUg.57$45.150(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >>>>> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>>>In article <4523844C.CA22EFDF(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore >>>>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In article <4522F8DE.C46161BD(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore writes: >>>>>>>> >mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> You didn't read carefully. It is not "10% changing". It is that >>>>>>>> >> historical data indicates dramatic changes when about 10% of the >>>>>>>> >> population is *dead*. Does this make it clear? >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >So, we only need to kill 100 million Muslims or so ? >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I didn't say, at the moment, what we need (or need not) to do. I >>>>>>>> pointed what empirical data for past conflicts shows. Go argue with >>>>>>>> history if you don't like it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>But you still mainatain we'd need to kill that many to have an effect ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Graham >>>>>>> >>>>>>Not that "we'd need" but that, as a worst case scenario, we may need. >>>>> >>>>>The oddity of this, which I cannot find in past history, is that >>>>>the extremists are already doing this to themselves. >>>>> >>>>It is not that odd. Extremists are striving for a very high degreee >>>>of coherence, in their own camp. This involves "purifying" your side >>>>from "dubious elements". >>> >>>This is premature viewing and we won't know until 10-80 years from >>>now but... >>> >>>It seems like they are not purifying but self-emolating. >> >>Bah, you need some sense of scale. > >Yes, I know I have problems with that. > >> Check out how many Russians were >>eliminated by Stalin, and how many Chinese by Mao. No, they're most >>certainly ***not*** self-emolating. They're "cleaning the ranks". > >And in Russia, a very pissed off army was digging the potato >crop 30 years later. I haven't read enough about China yet. >> This is irrelevant to the issue. >>> Isn't there a difference? This self-emolation as part of their >>>ritual practice is what seems odd. >> >>There is nothing to seem odd, since they're not doing it. > >Right. They are not doing it now. > Aha. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
From: Eeyore on 8 Oct 2006 14:43 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > If the mindset of the religious extremists are not changed and > they become successful in destroying Western civilization....... How could they even begin to acheive this ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 8 Oct 2006 14:45 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > > If the mindset of the religious extremists are not changed and > > they become successful in destroying Western civilization, the > > problems that _are_ killing people today will no longer exist. > > I believe you mentioned those killed in automobile accidents. > > Those accidents won't happen because there won't be any autos > > on the roads. > > All the lost medicines and better quality foods will shorten the > average lifespan by a decade or two, so what's your point? Better quality foods ? Stuff like modern hydrogenated fats actually *shortens* lives ! What a ridiculous idea. Graham
From: Eeyore on 8 Oct 2006 14:49 Daniel Mandic wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > > Still, it is amazing how well he managed to get rid of the evidence > > come the invasion. If only he had used that skill for the UN > > inspectors the war would never have happened. > > Yes. > > And a slighter tread, in the time of invasion. Attack is Attack, let's > say it is so, but the actions taken contradict any American thinking. > > With cannons on sparrows! Your metaphors are entertainingly brilliant ! Graham
From: John Fields on 8 Oct 2006 14:47
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 18:36:02 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Do you think we blow up commercial airliners for the fun of it? > >On the balance of evidence I'd have to say yes I'm afraid. --- Just what I'd expect from an Ameriphobe like you. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |