Valeev is by no means the worst offender

Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

jmfbahciv wrote:
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

My guess is that this particular think-challenged soul is the
sort who will interrupt and disrupt any discussion that takes
place without him...rather like having a toddler in the room.
While I agree in theory with your premise, I suspect that given
the living entities involved, it's impossible to pull off in prac-
tice. :-(

Oh, but that's why newsgroups work. No whinging sounds interrupt
an exchange.

Evidence would seem to suggest that most newsgroups
_don't_ work...in fact, most are so cluttered with noise
the signal is pretty much lost.

That's part of the fun....turning noise into quality signal :-).

BTW, why didn't you go after the Marine Bio?

No money. Turns out, looking back, I probably would not have
done anything remarkable in the bio field. What I did do is help
make it possible so the science types had access to as many
compute cycles as possible and be able to write their own code
and specs with a minimum of turnaround time.

/BAH



/BAH

jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:

eirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
:
: jmfbahciv wrote:
: Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
:
: My guess is that this particular think-challenged soul is the
: sort who will interrupt and disrupt any discussion that takes
: place without him...rather like having a toddler in the room.
: While I agree in theory with your premise, I suspect that given
: the living entities involved, it's impossible to pull off in prac-
: tice. :-(
:
: Oh, but that's why newsgroups work. No whinging sounds interrupt
: an exchange.
:
: Evidence would seem to suggest that most newsgroups
: _don't_ work...in fact, most are so cluttered with noise
: the signal is pretty much lost.
:
:That's part of the fun....turning noise into quality signal :-).
:

A pity there are so many netloons working to do the reverse.

:
:
: BTW, why didn't you go after the Marine Bio?
:
:
:No money. Turns out, looking back, I probably would not have
:done anything remarkable in the bio field. What I did do is help
:make it possible so the science types had access to as many
:compute cycles as possible and be able to write their own code
:and specs with a minimum of turnaround time.
:

Partly the same reason I switched from chemistry. Engineering is more
fun and pays better.


--
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
-- Charles Pinckney

Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

jmfbahciv wrote:
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
I don't know if it's "more interestingly", but it's certainly
"more likely"...particularly if one is working with living
entities with their own agendas. Microbes can be such
notional wee things. :-)

I said "more interestingly" because most efforts stop and
tidy up after something works. IOW, no more work at finding
something that works. But that may not be the case in a
science lab. It certainly is the case in business.

It's infinite regression...every answer raises more questions and
every time something works, it merely becomes a new building
block in making something else work. The remarkable, wahoo-we-
did-it! success in 2001 is 2009's Student Methodology.

I can spend weeks/months up in my lab trying to convince my
critters to behave in a given manner, which means I have to
understand their natural behaviour and exploit it...in the pro-
cess of gaining that understanding I'm going to hit a lot of
roadblocks and discover a multitude of things which don't
work. But, let's say after a time I solve the problem and I
have a sample.

I trot my sample down to the beam and the measurements
invariably raise more questions: Why didn't they do insert
desired behaviour here? Why did they do insert unexpected
behaviour here? Is it an artifact? Introduced by the beam?
The atmosphere? The processing? Or is it supposed to be
there? Can I explain it as a natural attribute? Can I replicate
it?

Now, I get to do it all over again and hope the bugs behave the
same way...sometimes they don't, if they don't I have another
problem to solve (which occasionally results in new answers,
but is more likely to result in new questions). Back to the beam
and more measurements...cross fingers and hope the results
are within range of the earlier ones....if so, they still need to
be explained in terms of the system...if they're different the
discrepancy needs to be accounted for.

Even if everything works, I might still need to find a different
method if I can't explain _why_ it works. It's a bit different
than business in that regard.

Quite a bit different :-). In business, you get paid for
reproducible results and never get time to write up what
didn't work. If you're real lucky (or smart enough to
plan ahead), you sometimes get to figure out why stuff didn't
work. I'm talking mostly about hard/software developement
of computer manufacturers; we only sold the stuff that worked
consistently. Time frames for getting the stuff to work
were a lot shorter than yours.

/BAH

wrote:
On Feb 24, 12:33 pm, American wrote:
Sure, SOME CAPITALISM is based on pure greed..

Most.

But please, PLEASE, don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater"

Bush has already done that! He had all lkinds of time to fix all kinds
of things. He sat on his ass.

snip

Bull****. He did his job.

/BAH

Fred J. McCall wrote:
jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:

eirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
:
: jmfbahciv wrote:
: Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:
:
: My guess is that this particular think-challenged soul is the
: sort who will interrupt and disrupt any discussion that takes
: place without him...rather like having a toddler in the room.
: While I agree in theory with your premise, I suspect that given
: the living entities involved, it's impossible to pull off in prac-
: tice. :-(
:
: Oh, but that's why newsgroups work. No whinging sounds interrupt
: an exchange.
:
: Evidence would seem to suggest that most newsgroups
: _don't_ work...in fact, most are so cluttered with noise
: the signal is pretty much lost.
:
:That's part of the fun....turning noise into quality signal :-).
:

A pity there are so many netloons working to do the reverse.

Since Ian has decided to become vicious, I'm not going to try with his
posts anymore.

:
:
: BTW, why didn't you go after the Marine Bio?
:
:
:No money. Turns out, looking back, I probably would not have
:done anything remarkable in the bio field. What I did do is help
:make it possible so the science types had access to as many
:compute cycles as possible and be able to write their own code
:and specs with a minimum of turnaround time.
:

Partly the same reason I switched from chemistry. Engineering is more
fun and pays better.


I didn't care about the pay.

/BAH

---- AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ----

Andorkles is by all means the worst offender.

"hanson" wrote:
--- http://tinyurl.com/dfz536 ---

[ snipped most of Andro's sad tripe wherein he relives
now his 2nd early child hood with Buggs Bunny who has
become his idol: http://tinyurl.com/4sbexo ... ahahaha]

Andorkles wrote:
Man, this is SO easy to write. No thought required at all.
I've [been] explained [...] the geriatric symptoms of [my]
encroaching senility.

hanson wrote:
ahahaha... Wow, a brief flash of lucidity has manifested
in Andro! .. So, Andro, go have the last word now so
that you can bask in the glory your sorry state and say:
"I won!"... & re-enforce thereby my diagnosis of/about
your sad condition: --- http://tinyurl.com/dfz536 ---.
TFTLIA..... AHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahahanson

"hanson" wrote in message
...
---- AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ----

Andorkles is by all means the worst offender.

"hanson" wrote:
--- http://tinyurl.com/dfz536 ---

[ snipped most of Andro's sad tripe wherein he relives now his 2nd early
child hood with Buggs Bunny who has
become his idol: http://tinyurl.com/4sbexo ... ahahaha]

Andorkles wrote:
Man, this is SO easy to write. No thought required at all.
I've [been] explained [...] the geriatric symptoms of [my]
encroaching senility.

hanson wrote:
ahahaha... Wow, a brief flash of lucidity has manifested
in Andro! .. So, Andro, go have the last word now so that you can bask
in the glory your sorry state and say: "I won!"... & re-enforce thereby my
diagnosis of/about your sad condition: --- http://tinyurl.com/dfz536 ---.
TFTLIA..... AHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahahanson


A Harvard professor's testimony to the government on the effects of cutting
off the ends of dicks has inflamed a 60-year-long debate over the practice's
safety and its place in the mental health scheme- prompting a University
investigation into his work that has garnered nationwide attention.

Chester Bigass, chair of the Genital Health Policy and Epidemiology
Department at the Harvard School of Penile Medicine (HSPM), submitted
written testimony to the National Research Council last year claiming that
there was no significant link between circumcision and Einstein
dingleberryism, a common but benign form of bigotry particularly prevalent
in the USA.

Since then, several environmental advocacy groups have questioned the
validity of his research, claiming conflict of interest and outright
deception.

"His conclusion that there is no link is a lie," said Kim Throop, the head
toxicologist for the Environmental Clipping Group, the Washington-based
organization that filed the initial ethics complaint with the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. "He cites work in his
references, but directly contradicts it in his write-up."

At the heart of the group's claims lies the work of one of Bigass' doctoral
students, Elise B. Ballsy. Using Bigass' data, Ballsy came up with a
different set of conclusions-she found that circumcision makes the risk
of dingleberryism five to seven times higher.

Ballsy's work has never been published in a peer-reviewed journal, a gold
standard for scientific authenticity. Select portions of her study, however,
have been publicized by the Environmental Clipping Group.

While HSPM is investigating the allegations, several Harvard professors
have spoken out in support of their colleague.

Byron Allfukian Jr., a Harvard associate clinical professor and one of the
foremost experts in penal health policy, called the environmental groups'
claims "ridiculous" and "illogical," saying that Bigass is a world leader in
the field and that the results of his seven-year study should be treated
with respect.

"The claims don't hold fluoridated semen," Allfukian said. "If I was going
to take every study done by a student and say that this should be public
policy, then we'd be in very bad shape."

Another group, the Circumcision Action Network, has accused Bigass of
having a conflict of interest. Bigass edits the Trojan Penile Care Report, a
newsletter subsidized by Durex International, which looks at issues
affecting
penile and mental health. Colgate uses fluoride in its popular toothpaste
and
although that is irrelevant it is an important aspect of Einstein
dingleberryism,
irrelevance being the major symptom of the disease.

Claiming "ties to a company that profits from circumcision," the network
asked the National Institute of Health, which has funded Bigass' work, to
remove Bigass from the study, eliminate all other conflicts of interest, and
publish his data along with his conclusions.

But P. Brice Jerkoff, dean of the HSPM, says that Bigass' work with the
journal "represents no conflict of interest" and has been reviewed by the
University.

"He edits a newsletter that is part of a learning experience for hookers
worldwide," said Jerkoff, who expects the investigation to be completed
in a month or two.

This is the first time Bigass has faced allegations of misconduct in his
roughly 30 years working at Harvard, said Jerkoff.

But other groups are not waiting for the results of Harvard's investigation.
Unions from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), longtime
opponents of semen fluoridization, seized on the allegations against
Bigass, writing a letter to the EPA administrator calling for a moratorium
on programs that add circumcision to penises.

But Allfukian, who is also the former chair of the U.S. Surgeon General's
Clipping Group on Circumcision and Mental Health, says that the
preponderance of evidence favors circumcision, and that the groups
criticizing Bigass' work are probably fringe groups reminiscent of the movie
"Deep Throat".

"When this was first implemented, a lot of people thought it was a communist
plot," he said. "The Government started circumcising communities in 1945...
and by 1950 saw such a dramatic benefit that the government endorsed it for
the entire country."

Since then dingleberryism has shown a dramatic increase among males, but no
significant increase among females.

Dr. Stephen Hawking-Gonads IV, a professor in Bigass' department, said that
he does not think that any of his colleagues would support ending
circumcision
programs.

"Circumcision has worked so well," he said. Circumcision strengthens dick
heads and reduces thinking, lowering the resistance to Einstein's genius,
said
Hawking-Gonads.

On Feb 25, 7:58*am, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
wrote:
On Feb 24, 12:33 pm, American wrote:
Sure, SOME CAPITALISM is based on pure greed..

Most.

But please, PLEASE, don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater"

Bush has already done that! He had all lkinds of time to fix all kinds
of things. He sat on his ass.

snip

Bull****. *He did his job.


If by job you mean wreck the economy and start two wars and finish
none? Yeah, he did us a *JOB* alright. You Republicans just won't
admit when your own screw up. Apolgizing for Bush makes you look like
a total fool. At least Clinton balance the budget and didn't wreck the
economy. And the one war he got into he finished and the objectives
were met. Sorry, your party is in a shambles because it did it to
itself.

Are your parents better off now than they were in 2001?! Go ask them!
Go ask anyone that is retired and then tell me Bush did his job!

Eric

On Feb 24, 4:38*pm, American wrote:
On Feb 24, 12:53*pm, wrote:

: Payback?

You betcha

I think you need to define "payback". Your "you betcha" reminds me
that Palin has made such a name for herself and everyone knows her,
espcially ****ed off Alaskans who now know to whom to direct their
anger for their problems. But THAT is the topic of another post.


: You obviously are a very practical man but are no
: scientist. You MUST take risks in order to get gain.

Agreed, however, that would depend on how many
scientists are involved with the project. (I'm
guessing that there are, perhaps a few hundred
thousand educated people out there with the in-
telligence to pursue a project of this magnitude.

Of course, that would also mean that these people
have the ability to organize into intelligent
groups under varied disciplines.

Worked during Apollo days.

: That aside the sheer aspect of finding something
: in the core even if it wasn't water would have
: scientific benefit. But if it was water, then the
: payback would be being able to have your own water
: while you were on Mars which could become the same
: economically as discovering the next New World as
: Columbus often gets creditted for. Not next year
: or even next decade. Century? Yes!

Mars is too deep a gravity well for exploration.

Earth's is bigger and we explore it all the time.

You can accomplish much more without having to
contend with powerlaunches by investigating the
delta-V's of various asteroids - in proximity to
water-bearing moons (like Enceladus or Europa).

Enceladus is at Saturn at roughy 10 AUs, Europa is at Jupiter at
roughly 5 AUs, Mars is at 1.5 AUs. Now what were you saying about
delta-Vs? I know these numbers from memory. You go look them up now!
Then come back to me when you want to play more at Solar System
astronomy. If there is water on Mars, then we should use it!

A voyage to Mars, although a romanticist's dream,
doesn't do much in the realm of space-based
utilitarianism. The environment won't support
life for extended periods without constant life-
support.

We would be able to do more with Mars since it has much better solar
radiation than does the asteriods and potential water-bearing moons
that orbit gas giants, simply because Mars is closer. If the moon had
an atmosphere, which is doesn't, and had known water, which it
doesn't, then IT would be the better choice because it is closer to us
and to the Sun.

Sure, once a base has become established,
all kinds of studies can be made while in planetary
isolation, but what does this really accomplish?

The roots of colonization. Growing food, etc.

O'neill colonies achieve the same thing without
getting caught in the gravity wells of planets,
and also permit more earthly orbital type infra-
structures to become established for some actual
space industry for a space-faring civilization
to propogate throughout the solar system.

No natural water. Mars has water as found by several landers. Not
standing liquid water but in the permafrost. We need to create liquid
water from the permafrost in a lander's lab the next time we send one.

: You don't think that far ahead, do you? Are you
: like those GM types that have a 10-day forecast,
: to which the Japanese found firghtening?

You making fun of GM?

No! I am making fun of GM execs that thought no further ahead than the
next 10 days!

Take a look at how the Arabs
control the oil, and you'll get an idea of how the
auto industry must follow suit.

It seems that the Japanese and Europeans, that still have healthy auto
industries, have managed to find a way to deal with the Arabs. Stop
sounding like a victim and especially the Arabs, it doesn't suit you
or your name.

We're sick and
tired of high oil prices, but the rest of the
world wants to sanction the U.S. as a trading
partner, because most of this propoganda being
spewed by the ignorant don't know that there is
actually an infinite supply - they think in terms
their cups being half full, when they're actually
half emptied by greedy Arabs and greedy bureaucrats.

He have had cheap oil for years and the rest of the world paid through
the nose. I know, I lived in Europe. The rest of the world is getting
even. That is all. It won't last forever.
I remember when the German Mark was worth a quarter. Now the euro is
worth more than the dollar. You want progress? Let's work on reaching
parity with the euro and then passing them!

: Look at GM now. We had BETTER learn to think
: five years ahead if we plan on being here then!
: The same goes for 100!

The economy of orbital and transorbital technologies of
an asteroid mining technology venture would depend upon
a massive political and cultural drive in order to gen-
erate the market incentive for propogating the technology
in order to establish an eternally accessible, earth-to-
orbit market - competing directly with the earth-based
mining infrastructure, specifically legislated by an
independent authority to decrease the monopolies that
have become entrenched by the interlocking corporate
directorships of the New World Order.


There is no supply and demand problem with metal today that warrants
the cost of spaceflight to the asteroids to bring back metal to earth.
Sure I like the Dawn mission, but it isn't going to be the next quarry
for earth-based manufacturing. We'll use the asteroids for space-based
manufacturing.

Doesn't anyone recognize that the NWO is an *evil* entity?
(Based upon the current economic climate, I'll bet NO)

The planet is 7,927 miles wide. Always has been always will be. We are
6.6 billion and growing. They say by 2050 we'll level off. The point
is that the more people there are means a shrinking earth that must be
dealt with. You can't undo global communication and technological
progress like the internet. It is here to stay.

Eric

jmfbahciv wrote:

Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

jmfbahciv wrote:

I said "more interestingly" because most efforts stop and
tidy up after something works. IOW, no more work at finding
something that works. But that may not be the case in a
science lab. It certainly is the case in business.

It's infinite regression...every answer raises more questions and
every time something works, it merely becomes a new building
block in making something else work. The remarkable, wahoo-we-
did-it! success in 2001 is 2009's Student Methodology.

Quite a bit different :-). In business, you get paid for
reproducible results and never get time to write up what
didn't work.

Compliments of my lab notebook, I get to write up what
doesn't work as I go. :-)

If you're real lucky (or smart enough to
plan ahead), you sometimes get to figure out why stuff didn't
work.

Sometimes, however, it's simply not worth the effort...why
didn't that culture re-vivify? Dunno and it's not worth the
time to figure it out, simply grab another and try again. Now,
if you get reproducible failures with something that's worked
in the past, you might need to investigate, but most of the
time simply remaking media or stock solutions can "fix"
things...this is especially true if someone unfamiliar (read:
student) with SOP made them up.

I'm talking mostly about hard/software developement
of computer manufacturers; we only sold the stuff that worked
consistently. Time frames for getting the stuff to work
were a lot shorter than yours.

Well, we're in arenas with different goals, hm? I presume
you're in a for-profit setting whereas I'm parked in a for-info
one. Different settings are going to result in different time
frames, yours, being more market driven is going to be more
impatient for useable, marketable results. While we don't
have the luxury of lolly-gagging about, we also don't have a
shareholder pointing a metaphorical gun to our heads asking
what the delay in release is. It's not that we've no pressure,
it's just that's it's a different sort...more self inflicted. :-)

Deirdre