Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 12 Oct 2006 04:44 On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:55:38 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Larkin wrote: > >> JoeBloe <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >> >> >On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 03:00:25 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: >> > >> >>No, Ockham's Razor suggests >> > >> > Totally retarded. >> >> "Ockham's Razor" is not a law of nature, it's an easy way to avoid >> thinking about things that might hurt your head. > >It's a way of removing irrelevant clutter. --- Kind of like plonking you, then? -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: Robert Latest on 12 Oct 2006 05:02 ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.] On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:25:59 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in Msg. <uu8ri25d43ms9k07u8ued1dc2rde6fqmru(a)4ax.com> > No. See my post above. Given imperfect data, I'd be inclined towards a > more flexible - more complex - solution to give me wiggle room to > adjust for the unexpected. A scientific theory is not the same as a technical solution to an engineering problem. robert
From: John Fields on 12 Oct 2006 05:05 On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:10:35 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >John Larkin wrote: >> > >> >> It's not that big a leap... >> >> >> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061010/ts_nm/security_qaeda_libi_dc_2 >> > >> >Why are you so fixated on utter loonies ? >> >> --- >> I don't know about Larkin, but I find your behavior fascinating. > >In what respect ? --- Basically, the unrelenting begging for attention. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: John Fields on 12 Oct 2006 05:30 On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:16:15 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 05:59:28 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >JoeBloe wrote: >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >> >> >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>>You make more mistakes simply because Americans are sloppy about >> >> >>>everything. >> >> >>> >> >> >>>Graham >> >> >> >> >> >> Everything? ICs? Jet aircraft? Agriculture? Electronics design? >> >> > >> >> >Yeah, pretty much..... :-) >> >> > >> >> You stupid fucks wouldn't even be sitting in front of your computers >> >> right now were it not for us, and no, I am not talking about how we >> >> saved your asses, I am talking about technology, and the fact that you >> >> are lucky that we are your ally. >> > >> >The UK made the world's first electronic computer. >> >> --- >> I get: http://www.cs.iastate.edu/jva/jva-archive.shtml >> >> Do you a cite to disprove it? > >From the context it should have been clear I was referring to a fully electronic >stored-program computer. --- What context? The claim was made that you wouldn't be sitting in front of your computers had it not been for us, and you countered with: "The UK made the world's first electronic computer." which just isn't true. Moreover, had it not been for that _first_ electronic computer from Atanasoff it's doubtful whether you would have gotten very far with that "Manchester Baby" anyway. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: John Fields on 12 Oct 2006 05:39
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:23:21 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> You people keep focusing on the buildings. Why don't you spend >> >> a nanosecond thinking about the people who were killed, the >> >> trade that was interrupted and the destruction of the >> >> knowledge of how to do all this stuff? >> > >> >Like I said. Ppl are replaceable. >> >> --- >> Have you ever lost a child? > >I lost my parents at a relatively young age. Will that suffice ? --- No. I asked whether you'd ever lost a child. Why not just answer the question instead of doing your little dance of evasion? --- >Life moves on. --- Duh. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |