Valeev is by no means the worst offender

Ian Parker wrote:
On 22 Feb, 01:21, Deirdre Sholto Douglas
wrote:

Crackpotology is indeed interesting, but Ian only has a mild case of
nanobotology. All of his other symptoms are a result of that obsession.
Any port in a storm, kT...there simply aren't that many
crackpots in my world.

Most of us real crackpots have moved on to other more interesting
crackpot ideas. The whole idea of crackpotology is to keep moving,
because it's very large field where crackpot ideas seemingly appear out
of nowhere, only to vaporize into nonsense shortly thereafter, once
actual data and evidence start to appear. It's a useful tool for those
bored with traditional methods of science, but it's only a single tool.
Smart crackpots simply use their nuttiness to discover hidden truths.
That would seem to leave Ian out of the equation...he uses
his to _create_ overt falsifications.

Honestly, if science wasn't fun, the tedium would drive you insane ...
Got _that_ in one. And the pay usually sucks...no one does
this to get rich...but the toys can make up for a lot of tedium
and late hours...at least they have so far.

Look the idea of a manned trip to Mars with present technology is the
most crackpot idea of all. Your groung seems to have shifted. Having
discovered that NASA in in fact now (perhaps belatedly, but better
late than never) investing in new technology you are shifting your
ground.

I am not arrogant. I am prepared to listen. Problem is that so far you
have not given anyone anything worth listening to. I don't think
either that you have indended to.

You have talked about nanotechnology - probably in terms of the
Honeywell Buzzword Generator. ff you really want to discuss bio/nano
technology I, and I think other people too would be happy to hear from
you. However that contribution would have been far better made as a
response to my ORIGINAL posting on Kurzweil and NASA's buying into it.
Also the lavatory smearing with which you accompanied it is not
helpful either.

I am though impatient with people who have nothing to contribute and
spend their time smearing.


That's really too bad. You could have had a really interesting
thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas.

/BAH

"Helmut Wabnig" hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 03:08:00 GMT, "hanson" wrote:

Hey, Wabie,
I just put your handle into the subject line to get your attention.
Translate, tell us where that expression "macht das Kalb mit Dir"
or "mach doch mal kein Kalb" etc, is used and how it best
translates into English. Thanks
hanson

Swiss.
Switzerland. High mountains. Deep valleys.
Loneliness. Silence. Cattle.
Winds blow.

"Er macht das Kalb"

http://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/...eugen+vor.html


hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... you are catching on, Parker... ahahaha...
The Shemale "macht das Kalb with you"... IOW s/he is
just ****ing with you. So, enjoy it and it will crank him'er.
Thanks for the laughs guys.... ahahaha... ahahahanson


"Das Mädchen" (the girl) in German a neutrum - neuter.

GOETHE knew better:

"Hab ich als Mädchen sie satt,
dient sie als Knabe mir."

Am I wised up with her (as a girl),
she serves me as a lad.


Have Phun!
w.

We do, non-engineering dorks who think they know fysics are
always a scream.

On 22 Feb, 11:59, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:

That's really too bad. *You could have had a really interesting
thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas.

I think you have to think whether or not people want a serious answer
or not. Ms Douglas clearly does not. I think it would indeed be
arrogant of me to claim that my ideas were the only ones, or the best.
I am not claiming that. What I am claiming is that people who are
clearly intent on causing mischief and doing nothing more should be
dealt with in short time.

She does not want a proper discussion, she has in fact said so. So any
nonsense about way out ideas etc. is way off beam. NO ideas, way oout
or not have actually been presented.

On the Von Neumann machine Wiki has the following

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_machine

I have (up to now) posted on the basis of classical robotics. The Bath
rapid prototyper is a classical robot. If we postulate human manual
dexterity (surely not an extreme position as it is one shared by the
majority of scientists) we can say that the concept of the classical
VN robot/swarm is essentially the same, or easier than a space colony
of any sort. Far esier in fact as less life support is required.

The non nano concepts mentioned in that reference all involve hot
chemistry. Simplest way - Archimedes and the Roman fleet - Shine the
Sun on a patch of Moon/Asteroid. Nanotechnology is interesting from a
number of points of view. A nano system for extracting minerals will
work at ambient temperature. It will work by the chemistry of surface
receptors which could be biological in origin. Ligands will have an
electrochemical potential and the whole thing will work like a living
cell. This is by far and away the best solution - if it can be made to
work. Can it? Well as I have said nanotech is currently making a huge
contribution to technology. Living cells after all do not require
1000C to work.

What really is the height of arrogance is for people to dismiss such
work without really understanding it or its objectives. As I said it
is completely unacceptable to bring it in now (with a lavatorial
comment) and not before.

One thing which impresses me about the Singularity University is that
is is completely interdisiplinary. You are scientist, you are not a
physicist or biochemist. This is also a bee I have in my bonnet. If
you take another example Machine Translation you find that Arabists
tend to be interested in the politics of the Middle East rather than
in statistical methodology. Both are needed I feel for progress to be
made.

A German Helmut Wabnig is reading this thread. I wonder what
impression he is taking away with him. To me there is but one
conclusion. Americans have a lavatorial obseesion, and the military is
out of control. Ask yourself one other question. How loyal is it to
Obama?

It could well be that this is all helping to undermine NATO. Sure as
hell it ain't bringing us a better understanding.


- Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:
:
:Look the idea of a manned trip to Mars with present technology is the
:most crackpot idea of all.
:

Hardly. Insisting that non-existent technologies that aren't
necessary to the task must exist first is far, far more crackpot.

:
:Your groung seems to have shifted.
:

Not that anyone sane has noticed, it hasn't.

:
:Having discovered that NASA in in fact now (perhaps belatedly, but better
:late than never) investing in new technology you are shifting your
:ground.
:

NASA has always invested in new technology. However, it seems you're
confused about just what that technology is. Note that the
Singularity University does *NOT* list NASA as a 'partner'. Why do
you think that is, Ian? How much has NASA tossed in that particular
hopper?

:
:I am not arrogant.
:

You're arrogant AND ignorant AND stupid; the ultimate trifecta of
intellectual incompetence.

:
:I am prepared to listen. Problem is that so far you
:have not given anyone anything worth listening to. I don't think
:either that you have indended to.
:

Translation: You're prepared to 'listen' to ideas that you approve of
and ignore the rest. That's not 'listening', Ian.

:
:You have talked about nanotechnology - probably in terms of the
:Honeywell Buzzword Generator.
:

Here Ian goes with the "a lie repeated frequently enough can be
treated as truth" approach to unreasoned spew.

You really haven't a clue who Deirdre is or where she works, do you?

:
:ff you really want to discuss bio/nano
:technology I, and I think other people too would be happy to hear from
:you.
:

Except you're not competent to follow a conversation in those areas.

:
:However that contribution would have been far better made as a
:response to my ORIGINAL posting on Kurzweil and NASA's buying into it.
:

How much did NASA "buy into it" with, Ian? Give us the dollar figure.

I've repeatedly told you that Deirdre doesn't read the sci.space
newsgroups, so she probably didn't even SEE your original posting. You
keep not listening.

:
:Also the lavatory smearing with which you accompanied it is not
:helpful either.
:

Perhaps if you'd stop spewing **** people would stop calling it ****.

:
:I am though impatient with people who have nothing to contribute and
:spend their time smearing.
:

I'm impatient with people who haven't a clue and tell people who work
in the fields they can only fantasize about that they don't know
anything or have anything to contribute.

That's YOU, Ian.

:
:There is one other feature of the Sngularity University which I think
:is important. I think the SU is an important institution even if you
:do NOT believe in the Singularity or even in an accelerating future.
:

But you'll never name that 'feature', will you, Ian?

:
:As I have said before, it represents a range of technologies. Nanotech
:being extremely important. The SU unlike other insitutions is
:completly interdisciplinary. Is nanotech biology? Is it Physics? Can
:we combine nano physics with biochemistry? These questions I feel are
:important.
:

Nice gibbering, but you say nothing at all.

:
:Above all the work is going on NOW. It is not the far future. Many
:applications are in fact the PRESENT. Can NASA benefit? Yes in many
:ways, but only if the discoveries are used properly.
:

The Singularity Institute doesn't really do research. It doesn't even
really do in depth teaching.

Examine what's really going on, Ian. Cruise through their web pages.
List the specific research projects and their funding, principal
investigators, etc.

:
:There is above all one question we should perhaps be asking ourselves.
:What is your position. On the surface you are denser than asteroid
:Platinum. You simplyseem to be ignoring what is going on, ignoring
:references, completely misconstruing what other people say. Another
:view is that you are a bit brighter (still not bright) you are trying
:to sabotage the new policy. Why I don't know. Mistaken sense of
:layalty for Mick Griffin. He is not worth worriying about.
:

Back into Artificial Stupidity System (A.S.S.) mode again, I see. Ian
lists his conflicted views and tries to act as if there are multiple
people involved in them.

I guess "Mick Griffin" must be someone who works with "Herbert
Spencer"...

Seek help (or reprogramming), Ian. You simply don't pass the Turing
Test.


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

jmfbahciv wrote:

Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

kT wrote:
snip

Honestly, if science wasn't fun, the tedium would drive you insane ...

Got _that_ in one. And the pay usually sucks...no one does
this to get rich...but the toys can make up for a lot of tedium
and late hours...at least they have so far.


What I don't understand is why the crackpots avoid all lab work.
The reason to take science classes is to be able to play in the
labs. The lab class times were never long enough.

Their loss, our gain. :-)

I suspect it might have something to do with ego...the few
I've run across aren't (and haven't) actually worked in science
and so they seem to think there's something demeaning about
doing benchwork...especially ghasp! in a wet lab. In their
minds, the hands-on stuff is done to order (their order) by a
technician while they sit at a deck and think Big Ideas.

I don't know about you, but I didn't go into this field to sit
behind a desk or rot in meetings (which is not to say I don't
have to do both on occasion)...I chose this path so I could
get paid for satisfying my own curiosity while playing with
some of the most expensive toys in town. So far, that plan
has panned out nicely. :-)

Deirdre

Paranoid much, Ian?

Hint: This is a USENET NEWSGROUP. It has nothing to do with NASA,
the military, or any other such organization.

Please. SEEK PROFESSIONAL HELP.


Ian Parker wrote:

:On 22 Feb, 11:59, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
:
: That's really too bad. *You could have had a really interesting
: thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas.
:
:I think you have to think whether or not people want a serious answer
r not. Ms Douglas clearly does not. I think it would indeed be
:arrogant of me to claim that my ideas were the only ones, or the best.
:I am not claiming that. What I am claiming is that people who are
:clearly intent on causing mischief and doing nothing more should be
:dealt with in short time.
:
:She does not want a proper discussion, she has in fact said so. So any
:nonsense about way out ideas etc. is way off beam. NO ideas, way oout
r not have actually been presented.
:
:On the Von Neumann machine Wiki has the following
:
:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_machine
:
:I have (up to now) posted on the basis of classical robotics. The Bath
:rapid prototyper is a classical robot. If we postulate human manual
:dexterity (surely not an extreme position as it is one shared by the
:majority of scientists) we can say that the concept of the classical
:VN robot/swarm is essentially the same, or easier than a space colony
f any sort. Far esier in fact as less life support is required.
:
:The non nano concepts mentioned in that reference all involve hot
:chemistry. Simplest way - Archimedes and the Roman fleet - Shine the
:Sun on a patch of Moon/Asteroid. Nanotechnology is interesting from a
:number of points of view. A nano system for extracting minerals will
:work at ambient temperature. It will work by the chemistry of surface
:receptors which could be biological in origin. Ligands will have an
:electrochemical potential and the whole thing will work like a living
:cell. This is by far and away the best solution - if it can be made to
:work. Can it? Well as I have said nanotech is currently making a huge
:contribution to technology. Living cells after all do not require
:1000C to work.
:
:What really is the height of arrogance is for people to dismiss such
:work without really understanding it or its objectives. As I said it
:is completely unacceptable to bring it in now (with a lavatorial
:comment) and not before.
:
:One thing which impresses me about the Singularity University is that
:is is completely interdisiplinary. You are scientist, you are not a
hysicist or biochemist. This is also a bee I have in my bonnet. If
:you take another example Machine Translation you find that Arabists
:tend to be interested in the politics of the Middle East rather than
:in statistical methodology. Both are needed I feel for progress to be
:made.
:
:A German Helmut Wabnig is reading this thread. I wonder what
:impression he is taking away with him. To me there is but one
:conclusion. Americans have a lavatorial obseesion, and the military is
ut of control. Ask yourself one other question. How loyal is it to
:Obama?
:
:It could well be that this is all helping to undermine NATO. Sure as
:hell it ain't bringing us a better understanding.
:
:
: - Ian Parker

Ian Parker wrote:

On 22 Feb, 01:21, Deirdre Sholto Douglas
wrote:

Got _that_ in one. *And the pay usually sucks...no one does
this to get rich...but the toys can make up for a lot of tedium
and late hours...at least they have so far.

Look the idea of a manned trip to Mars with present technology is the
most crackpot idea of all. Your groung seems to have shifted. Having
discovered that NASA in in fact now (perhaps belatedly, but better
late than never) investing in new technology you are shifting your
ground.

Given that I've never argued for...or against...any Mars
mission, I'm not shifting anything, Ian. I've merely pointed
out that you don't appear to know anything factual about
microbiology or redox chemistry...and I've (apparently)
hardly plumbed the depths of your limitations.

You have talked about nanotechnology - probably in terms of the
Honeywell Buzzword Generator.

I have not. You must have been a fuller in a prior life,
Ian, because you generated that out of the whole cloth.

I am though impatient with people who have nothing to contribute and
spend their time smearing.

Your frustration with looking into a mirror must be
horrifying then.

Deirdre

jmfbahciv wrote:

That's really too bad. You could have had a really interesting
thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas.

I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he
makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami
of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said
statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup-
porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an
obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person
challenging him.

IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit
of himself.

Deirdre

"Androcles" wrote:
"Helmut Wabnig" hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat wrote:
"hanson" wrote:

Hey, Wabie,
I just put your handle into the subject line to get your attention.
Translate, tell us where that expression "macht das Kalb mit Dir"
or "mach doch mal kein Kalb" etc, is used and how it best
translates into English. Thanks
hanson

Wabie wrote:
Swiss. Switzerland. High mountains. Deep valleys.
Loneliness. Silence. Cattle. Winds blow.
"Er macht das Kalb"

http://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/...eugen+vor.html


hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... you are catching on, Parker... ahahaha...
The Shemale "macht das Kalb with you"... IOW s/he is
just ****ing with you. So, enjoy it and it will crank him'er.
Thanks for the laughs guys.... ahahaha... ahahahanson


Wabie wrote:
"Das Mädchen" (the girl) in German a neutrum - neuter.
GOETHE knew better:
"Hab ich als Mädchen sie satt,
dient sie als Knabe mir."
Am I wised up with her (as a girl),
she serves me as a lad.
Have Phun!
w.

"Androcles" wrote:
We do, non-engineering dorks who think they know fysics are always a
scream.

hanson wrote:
.... ahahahahaha... But Andro, this post was about IAN Parker,
not you, JOHN Parker. Don't be so confused and needy.
But to your relief and for your re-joycing, the interns just gave
me a requiem for and about you. See it in the 2 posts in which you
are running after me in full blown desperation. See you there.
....."Have Phun!" ... ahahahaha... ahahahansn

"Helmut Wabnig" hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat wrote:
in message ...
"hanson" wrote:

Hey, Wabie,
I just put your handle into the subject line to get your attention.
Translate, tell us where that expression "macht das Kalb mit Dir"
or "mach doch mal kein Kalb" etc, is used and how it best
translates into English. Thanks
hanson

Helmut Wabnig wrote:
Swiss. Switzerland. High mountains. Deep valleys.
Loneliness. Silence. Cattle. Winds blow.
"Er macht das Kalb"

http://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/...eugen+vor.html

hanson wrote:
Thanks Helm! That is one bitchen dictionary. Very Good!

hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... you are catching on, Parker... ahahaha...
The Shemale "macht das Kalb with you"... IOW s/he is
just ****ing with you. So, enjoy it and it will crank him'er.
Thanks for the laughs guys.... ahahaha... ahahahanson


Helmut Wabnig wrote:
"Das Mädchen" (the girl) in German a neutrum - neuter.
GOETHE knew better:
"Hab ich als Mädchen sie satt, dient sie als Knabe mir."
Am I wised up with her (as a girl), she serves me as a lad.
Have Phun!
w.

hanson wrote:
..... ahahaha... What a misogynist ******* that Goethe was.
If he'd say that today, all die Frauenvereine and the press
would serve him notice for a discrimination law suit and
lable Goethe as a pedophile and child abuser.... ahaha...
Thanks again, Wabie.. and yes I am having my laughs
ahahaha... ahahahanson