Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 9 Oct 2006 14:25 Ken Smith wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Anyone would think making nukes was easy the way the Republicans go on about it > >too. > > Actually it is fairly easy if you don't care about size or quality. The > material doesn't have to be "weapons grade" either. For a given yeld, the > bomb gets bigger as some very rapid function of impurity content but it > isn't a step function. You could stop short of what the US or Russia used > for material. > > To get a high yeld you need to get the reaction material together and to > stay together for a longish time while the pressure is trying to push it > apart. If you use a huge surplus of material its own interia will hold a > portion of the material in. This gives a low yeld and very dirty bomb. It also makes for a very heavy bomb with attendant issues wrt launching it on a missile ! Graham
From: Eeyore on 9 Oct 2006 14:29 John Larkin wrote: > If you don't have a morality, why would you object to anything the > USA, or North Korea, or Sudan does? Why would it matter to you? This > is a great mystery to me, why people who scoff at the concept of > morality criticize the US for doing, well, anything we do. Because the USA does a lot of immoral things maybe ? Graham
From: lucasea on 9 Oct 2006 14:32 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ege2t8$584$1(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <hsuWg.4640$NE6.3613(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > [....] >>Indeed. It is my observation that it is exactly this sort of xenophobia >>which is leading to much of the overreaction to terrorism. Bush may be >>fomenting it with his rhetoric of fear, but that rhetoric wouldn't work if >>people weren't so ready to distrust and believe evil of those who are >>different than them. For all I know, the terrorism itself may be partly a >>product of the terrorists' xenophobia. > > > Back when we clubbed dinner over the head for a living, it made sense to > distrust anyone that looked different. Members of a different troupe ere > likely a threat. We as a result have an instinct to distrust those that > differ. We need to recognize this human weakness. > > We also group things to make them easier to think of. This is an > advantage in many cases because it lets us get quickly to the right > answer. In many other cases, this grouping works against us because we > make the wrong groups. > > These needs to be taken into account when thinking about the motives of > others or even our motives. If two murders seen on the news have bushy > eyebrows, the public may group all people with bushy eyebrows and think of > them as murders. This would be an error, but it is much easier to correct > if you see its source. > > It seems that right now we have this sort of problem with terrorist and > Islamic. Without knowing they are doing it people are making a > subconcious grouping. Although they logically understand that there is a > difference they are working against their own instincts. You had me until that last sentence. I don't think many people do logically understand their own instincts. If they were, then when someone points out to them that they are mistaken in making overbroad generalizations about people, they would understand and accede. Instead, pointing it out to some people just garners indignation, insults, threats, etc.--we've seen examples of this very thing here in this thread. > I think it would > help a lot if they saw nonterrorist islamic folk on TV or even better in > real life. Agreed. That's why I'm trying to get BAH to so make some personal contacts, rather than just cherry-picking extremist right-wing tomes to read. She is simply unaware of and will not acknowledge her prejudices and filters, and the fallacy of the assumptions predicated thereupon. Eric Lucas
From: Eeyore on 9 Oct 2006 14:38 T Wake wrote: > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>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 ? > > > > You will help. I'm not make any specifications here just in > > case someone hasn't thought of it. > > Actually you are helping more. I can not go into details here as it may > still be a secret. LOL ! :~) Graham
From: Eeyore on 9 Oct 2006 14:41
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > Lloyd Parker wrote: > > > > It was in a commercial flight path. And the pilot had no way of knowing the > > ship was calling HIS plane. > > So, what plane did the pilot think they were calling? Moot. The Vincennes' radio calls were on a military frequency ( because they had misidentified the plane as an F-14).. The pilot never heard them and even if he had been able to, they weren't directed at the pilot of an airliner. Graham |