On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:11:08 +1000, Herodotus
wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:57:45 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Jul 21, 5:31*pm, Herodotus wrote:
... I'm going to hide all my science books now and change my
subscription name details to New Scientist and Scientific American.

I first saw a copy of "New Scientist" in the laundry room at the Opua
Marina in New Zealand in 01'. I thought "'New Scientist', eh, that
will be some kind of touchy-feely new age thing, but it should amuse
me while the clothing spins." Little did I know. I've been a
subscriber every since. They go to my brother's house and one of the
joys of home port is the knowledge that there will be a stack of them
waiting for me.

-- Tom.

Yes Tom, its a great magazine. It is not a technical as "Scientific
American" which I have subscribed to since university days. It makes
difficult subjects simple to understand without losing any of the
essential parts.

What I like is that when I am away from home I can just logon on the
web and read the articles anywhere. Nothing like the mental stimulus
and keeping up with developments whilst anchored in a foreign port.

regards
Peter


Good Lord Peter, what kind of magazine are you promoting to poor
innocent readers of the Internet? Figuring "Good Old Peter" is
probably on to something I did a google search for "New Scientist" and
the first thing that popped up was:
"Oral sex-related cancer at 30-year high".







Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

Good Lord Peter, what kind of magazine are you promoting to poor
innocent readers of the Internet? Figuring "Good Old Peter" is
probably on to something I did a google search for "New Scientist" and
the first thing that popped up was:
"Oral sex-related cancer at 30-year high".

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

Great!

Bruce, you have discovered one of the best kept secrets of science.

It does not have to be as boring as the teachers made it in High
School. It can actually be quite exciting.

As a Zoology was my academic training, even though IT and
telecommunications provided most of my living, I have never ceased to
be interested in the "inner world". That's why I have a very good
binocular microscope on my boat.

One can even discuss at the dinner table in very polite company,
providing one keeps a straight face and portrays the correct amount of
"academic" enthusiasm, normally taboo subjects such as
sado-masochistic sex practices of animals such as the hermaphroditic
common garden snail Helix aspersa and the oral sexual antics of the
praying mantis. I have done so with immunity on a number of occasions
and surprisingly got invited back again.

I don't know if you know it but many snails are hermaphrodites; that
is they have both male and female sex organs within the same body
there being no distinct male or female sexes. In other words, their
religious mantra is "Do unto others as they are doing it unto thee".
When they conjugate (I refuse to use the vulgar Americanism, the "F"
word), they place their opposing glands against each other and this is
where the sado-masochism comes in. They have another gland which
produces a large pointed calcium dart which each fires into the body
of the other partner as they writhe around each other in copious slime
secretions. This causes them get overly excited and thus to ejaculate
sperm into each other. Thus cross fertilisation is achieved. Very
erotic indeed. Well, I at least am very aroused at this time.

There is nothing new on the face of the earth. If the Intelligent
Designers were appraised of this knowledge they would be forced to
accept sado-masochistic web sights showing cavorting bondage and
whipping devotees as permissible for their children and adherents to
watch as it has obviously been designed by a creator into even the
lower life forms. To the pure, all things are pure.

As to the praying mantis. The male mounts the willing female from
behind after usually (species dependent) presenting her with a meal of
an insect. He inserts his "thingee" into the appropriate place and
begins to perform intercourse. OK. Pretty standard and not very erotic
so far you say with a yawn.

Now we come to the interesting bit. The head of insects contains the
"brain" or cerebral ganglia which have an inhibitory action on the
other ganglia in its body which do much of the controlling of the
nervous system. This means that it tends to slow down actions. The
"brain" and thus the head are not at all vital to the insect as ours
is. In fact, if you cut off a beetle's or a fly's head it will still
live and walk about. It will eventually starve as it has also lost its
mouthparts.

Well, the male is still humping away as he was when we left him but
cannot hump fast enough to ejaculate his sperm. At this stage the
female, who can turn her head around on her thorax over 180 degrees
does so and begins to eat him head first. As soon as his head is gone,
there is no longer inhibition against the other ganglia and the body
actions, in this case, humping (I didn't want to use the term
"Thrusting" as that may overly excite you and at your age that could
be dangerous) faster and then ejaculating. In a daze of post-coital
bliss and relaxation his entire body is finally consumed by the love
of his life. - What a way to go. Much better than having a cigarette
afterwards and thinking "Oh God! now I have to have a shower. What is
her name? I hope she doesn't think that I want to maintain a
relationship and all the other thoughts.

By the way, this is also the origin of the oft used term "giving head"

My God I do get carried away sometimes.

cheers
Peter

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:47:55 -0700, Stephen Trapani wrote:

american_with_head_up_ass
I wouldn't worry too much about the "discrediting." The US has been
saving the world's asses for about a hundred years now and that doesn't
appear to be about to change anytime soon. When they see how much better
off Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East are ten years from now, along
with whatever else we happen to have to do to stand up for freedom,
they'll be singing a different tune. Or, the good people will anyway.
There will still be tyrants trying to drum up hate against the leader of
the free world though. Careful you don't let them fool you.
/american_with_head_up_ass

do you actually believe this ****? please tell me you aren't serious...

mister b wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:47:55 -0700, Stephen Trapani wrote:

american_with_head_up_ass
I wouldn't worry too much about the "discrediting." The US has been
saving the world's asses for about a hundred years now and that doesn't
appear to be about to change anytime soon. When they see how much better
off Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East are ten years from now, along
with whatever else we happen to have to do to stand up for freedom,
they'll be singing a different tune. Or, the good people will anyway.
There will still be tyrants trying to drum up hate against the leader of
the free world though. Careful you don't let them fool you.
/american_with_head_up_ass

do you actually believe this ****? please tell me you aren't serious...

Let me guess. You think the world is going down the ****ter thanks
mostly to the US who is polluting and trying to colonize the world. You
think we should all live and let live, there is no form of government
that is better than any other and the US has no business fighting anyone
else's wars. 9/11 was a set up by the US government and so we really
have nothing to fear from Islamic extremists. You believe all that ****,
right?

Stephen

Herodotus wrote:
I wouldn't worry too much about the "discrediting." The US has been
saving the world's asses for about a hundred years now and that doesn't
appear to be about to change anytime soon. When they see how much better
off Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East are ten years from now, along
with whatever else we happen to have to do to stand up for freedom,
they'll be singing a different tune. Or, the good people will anyway.
There will still be tyrants trying to drum up hate against the leader of
the free world though. Careful you don't let them fool you.

Stephen

Like in Vietnam, and Cambodia. I thought you got reamed in Somalia and
never went back.

I didn't say that US was undefeated or infallible.

Also, by our history books World War I started in 1914, not when the
US decided to join.

WWII started in September 1939, not over two years later when you
finally decided to get involved after Pearl Harbour. Prior to that,
several million Chinese had been killed since 1937 by invading
Japanese forces without the US being concerned at all.

If you're saying that in some cases the US almost waited too long to go
to war, you're right. I'm sure that lesson is part of the reason for the
current mentality to strike earlier, especially after 9/11.

The way I hear
history told from many Americans, they were the sole combatants
against the Japanese and Germans.

Was Korea a victory for UN troops? Doubt it. It finally ended in a
stalemate.

A stalemate in which South Korea was rescued from tyranny, at least. And
don't forget what we did for Japan once World War II was over. The
transformation of Japan from thousands of years of tyranny to a
democracy is one of the reasons for the current mentality in Iraq. We
learned that all human beings love freedom and will embrace it if given
the chance.

I do not discount US involvement in the first and second World Wars,
and like most people, do sincerely appreciate the US getting involved
when it did, but please, don't pretend that you "saved the world's
arses" .

Slight exaggeration, for effect. But the point is basically true.
Instead of using our military power to take over the world, we want the
opposite, to free the world. Up until the last two hundred years or so
the world's history has been full of tyranny. The most powerful nation
on earth has always tried to conquer and rule the world. The US is
obviously different. We are not alone in this, as you say, but we are
certainly "alone at the top." As the most powerful we have been thrust
into the role of leader of the free world. We can't be too trigger
happy, but we can't be too hesitant to help either. It is a difficult
position to be in.

As for Iraq, Afghanistan and the entire Middle East being better off,
you might find that history will evolve to negate Western involvement
just as the Crusades in actuality made no more impact than a mosquito
bite on an elephant's rear end. You (and the many allied troops - it
is not solely a US war) can never win in Afghanistan for many of the
same reasons you could have never won in Vietnam, but then we don't
talk about our defeats do we?

If the current government in Iraq succeeds and stabilizes, it will be a
model for the rest of the area. Free speech and debate will shove
Islamic extremism into the dung heap of history where is belongs.

Stephen

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to
make the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and
temptations to depart from the path of righteousness that the lord
has laid out for you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just
couldn't let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's
reading, I recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen
Posting the same link yet again?
Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630
I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many
times. Was there something in the link having anything to do with what
we are talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?



I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend,
except to vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the
last 7 years.
Everything in my personal world, everything I contact even the
government has been very good. Wouldn't want anything to change there.

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the
president can change things for you?

Stephen


Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do
with the last seven years?

If things have been so good for you and you think a Republican president
has been largely responsible, why do you want that to change?

Stephen


Because it's not all about me or you or likely anyone who's on this
newsgroup.

It's about the suffering going on due to Bush's insolence and corruption.
I'm sick of his pandering to the right-wing religious nuts who want gov't to
stay out of their lives, but who want to turn this into a
religious/fascist/fundamentalist state of their own design, but not that
dissimilar to the Taliban. I'm sick of him starting and then perpetuating a
war of choice (Iraq) vs. one of necessity (Afganistan) and lying about it
the whole time. I'm sick of him ignoring and being so out of touch with
what's going on in this country that he thinks everything is just fine with
the economy, the lack of affordable healthcare for those worse off than
people like me and you, and ignoring the people in desperate situations
(e.g., New Orleans).

Don't think I'm absolving the formerly Republican controlled Congress
either. They are at least complicit. The Republicans are holding fast even
though the Dems are not in charge, basically preventing anything meaningful
to get done, because it's an election year. And, don't think I'm absolving
the Dem leadership in Congress either. I'm not happy that Pelosi refused to
consider impeachment. It was just fine to put the country through an
impeachment trial because Clinton lied about a blowjob, but it's not ok to
put the country through an impeachment trial because Bush/Cheney lied about
an unnecessary war? Absolutely unbelievable. Even one of our own Senators
(Feinstein), a supposed liberal, refuses to consider it.

The gov't in this country is spying on its citizens, detaining people
without trial (not just foreigners, but it's own citizens), and generally
trashing our civil rights. Overseas, even with the grudging funding of HIV
programs in Africa by the Bush Administration, there are so many strings
attached that countries are barred from using their own money to promote
safer sex with condoms if they want to receive money from the US.... all of
this due to the religio-fascists who have a strangle hold on that jerk in
office.

Regarding the presidential candidates.... Obama is far from perfect, but
compared to McCain.... someone who employs the same people who Bush used to
trash him in the 2000 election, who employs people who supposedly know
something about economics (Graham's PhD) who don't have a clue about the
level of pain felt by ordinary US citizens, who employs people who were
vocal supports of Jack Abramoff (who's sitting in prison convicted of
fraud), who was reprimanded himself over the Keating scandal (using very
poor judgement), who promotes this "family values" crap, while having a
somewhat less than stellar fidelity problem of his own (not just divorcing
his first wife when she was disabled, but cheating on her during their
marriage). Sure, McCain was a war hero. Nothing bad about that. He served
honorably, but for him to sit there and tell us that this qualifies him to
make good decisions is just plain dumb. He's been in the Senate for decades
and should have known better about Iraq. He used to be opposed to torture,
e.g., waterboarding, something used during the Spanish Inquisition to
torture people into false confessions, but he's ok with it now. He used to
be pro-choice, now his anti-choice, etc., etc.

Sorry for the rant, but you asked! LOL


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:54:27 -0700, Stephen Trapani wrote:

Let me guess. You think the world is going down the ****ter thanks
mostly to the US who is polluting and trying to colonize the world.

I think that when you only have 5% of the world's population and consume
30-35% of the worlds energy and resources and produce 30-35% of the
world's pollution...something is out of whack and only the most woefully
ignorant would ignore that...as to most US-based multinational
corporations and their activities in the political, economic and
environmental spheres...their record runs the gamut from shameful to
sociopathic.

You think we should all live and let live,

yes, until such time as your actions affect me negatively...then I get to
kick your ass...repeatedly...until your IQ goes up and you decide to ****
off

there is no form of government that is better than any other

nonsense, there are many great flavours of democracy but the American
form is no longer one of them...take the UK, France, any of the
Scandinavian countries... but you're so convinced of your superiority as
a result of a lifetime of propagandisation that you can't even conceive it

the US has no business fighting anyone else's wars.

the US has no business invading sovereign states under false pretences,
it's leadership cynically lying to it's citizens, creating paranoia among
the ignorant and squandering the wealth of it's citizens, the lives of
it's young service people and the reputation of the US worldwide, for
perhaps generations to come...and then there are the 1.5 billion Chinese
and nearly 1 billion Indians who are watching the behaviour of the US
very carefully...

9/11 was a set up by the US government

the only thing that you as an average ignorant American peasant can say
for certain about the WTC is that *you have no ****ing clue whatsoever
who planned and executed that attack*...since your next line indicates
you've drunk deeply from the kool-aid, you are apparently satisfied with
the pablum of propaganda served up by your politicians and can return
your attention to the important things in life...like cheap beer and pro-
football.

and so we really have nothing to fear from Islamic extremists.

my personal safety is more at risk from dumbass Americans crossing the
border with their goddamn handguns hidden in their cars/boats than any
Islamic terrorist...the world's safety is more at risk from dumbass
Christian extremists who advise the dumbass currently in charge of the
launch codes...and with these same dumbasses *believing* that the "end
time" wouldn't be such a bad thing at all with all of that going up to
see Jesus in heaven crap that goes along with a nuclear armageddon...you
can understand why some of us aren't exactly filled with confidence about
our safety...kinda tough on all those hundreds of millions of children
though...being incinerated alive...ah what the hell eh Steve...they
probably aren't the "good people" you wrote about.

You believe all that ****,
right?

no, what I believe is that *you* are full of ****

"mister b" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:54:27 -0700, Stephen Trapani wrote:

Let me guess. You think the world is going down the ****ter thanks
mostly to the US who is polluting and trying to colonize the world.

I think that when you only have 5% of the world's population and consume
30-35% of the worlds energy and resources and produce 30-35% of the
world's pollution...something is out of whack and only the most woefully
ignorant would ignore that...as to most US-based multinational
corporations and their activities in the political, economic and
environmental spheres...their record runs the gamut from shameful to
sociopathic.

You think we should all live and let live,

yes, until such time as your actions affect me negatively...then I get to
kick your ass...repeatedly...until your IQ goes up and you decide to ****
off

there is no form of government that is better than any other

nonsense, there are many great flavours of democracy but the American
form is no longer one of them...take the UK, France, any of the
Scandinavian countries... but you're so convinced of your superiority as
a result of a lifetime of propagandisation that you can't even conceive it

the US has no business fighting anyone else's wars.

the US has no business invading sovereign states under false pretences,
it's leadership cynically lying to it's citizens, creating paranoia among
the ignorant and squandering the wealth of it's citizens, the lives of
it's young service people and the reputation of the US worldwide, for
perhaps generations to come...and then there are the 1.5 billion Chinese
and nearly 1 billion Indians who are watching the behaviour of the US
very carefully...

9/11 was a set up by the US government

the only thing that you as an average ignorant American peasant can say
for certain about the WTC is that *you have no ****ing clue whatsoever
who planned and executed that attack*...since your next line indicates
you've drunk deeply from the kool-aid, you are apparently satisfied with
the pablum of propaganda served up by your politicians and can return
your attention to the important things in life...like cheap beer and pro-
football.

and so we really have nothing to fear from Islamic extremists.

my personal safety is more at risk from dumbass Americans crossing the
border with their goddamn handguns hidden in their cars/boats than any
Islamic terrorist...the world's safety is more at risk from dumbass
Christian extremists who advise the dumbass currently in charge of the
launch codes...and with these same dumbasses *believing* that the "end
time" wouldn't be such a bad thing at all with all of that going up to
see Jesus in heaven crap that goes along with a nuclear armageddon...you
can understand why some of us aren't exactly filled with confidence about
our safety...kinda tough on all those hundreds of millions of children
though...being incinerated alive...ah what the hell eh Steve...they
probably aren't the "good people" you wrote about.

You believe all that ****,
right?

no, what I believe is that *you* are full of ****


Tell us how you really feel! (And, fix your typos... we wouldn't want Dave
to get too upset)


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:46:01 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote

Bush can read?

OK, OK, it was a cheap shot.
Not a cheap shot at all. Of course he can read. He has however,
admitted on several occasions that he doesn't. If you know what is
right, are firm in your convictions, and are guided by faith and
prayer, there is nothing on paper you need to learn in order to
make the right decisions. Facts are simply confusing and
temptations to depart from the path of righteousness that the lord
has laid out for you.

Believe me, this is not satire. I'm absolutely serious.
Gosh when a set-up is this easy, with moralizing about "facts" not
getting in the way of predetermined biases; and with so many people
needing to believe so many false facts to ridicule Bush, I just
couldn't let this go.

For those who want to retain their ignorant bias about Bush's
reading, I recommend avoiding this link:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...7bushbooks.htm

Stephen
Posting the same link yet again?
Sorry, connection problem.

Check this, but don't let your head explode!

http://www.jibjab.com/view/209630
I subscribe to the Maher podcast and have seen and heard him many
times. Was there something in the link having anything to do with what
we are talking about here? If not, why did you recommend it?



I wasn't trying to get your head to explode! Nothing to recommend,
except to vote for McCain if you like the way things have gone in the
last 7 years.
Everything in my personal world, everything I contact even the
government has been very good. Wouldn't want anything to change there.

Things been pretty bad for you though, eh? Why do you think the
president can change things for you?

Stephen


Wrong again Stephen. Things have been very, very good for me and mine.
That's not the point. Do you think Bush and Company had nothing to do
with the last seven years?

If things have been so good for you and you think a Republican president
has been largely responsible, why do you want that to change?

Stephen


Because it's not all about me or you or likely anyone who's on this
newsgroup.

It's about the suffering going on due to Bush's insolence and corruption.
I'm sick of his pandering to the right-wing religious nuts who want gov't to
stay out of their lives, but who want to turn this into a
religious/fascist/fundamentalist state of their own design, but not that
dissimilar to the Taliban. I'm sick of him starting and then perpetuating a
war of choice (Iraq) vs. one of necessity (Afganistan) and lying about it
the whole time. I'm sick of him ignoring and being so out of touch with
what's going on in this country that he thinks everything is just fine with
the economy, the lack of affordable healthcare for those worse off than
people like me and you, and ignoring the people in desperate situations
(e.g., New Orleans).

Don't think I'm absolving the formerly Republican controlled Congress
either. They are at least complicit. The Republicans are holding fast even
though the Dems are not in charge, basically preventing anything meaningful
to get done, because it's an election year. And, don't think I'm absolving
the Dem leadership in Congress either. I'm not happy that Pelosi refused to
consider impeachment. It was just fine to put the country through an
impeachment trial because Clinton lied about a blowjob, but it's not ok to
put the country through an impeachment trial because Bush/Cheney lied about
an unnecessary war? Absolutely unbelievable. Even one of our own Senators
(Feinstein), a supposed liberal, refuses to consider it.

The gov't in this country is spying on its citizens, detaining people
without trial (not just foreigners, but it's own citizens), and generally
trashing our civil rights. Overseas, even with the grudging funding of HIV
programs in Africa by the Bush Administration, there are so many strings
attached that countries are barred from using their own money to promote
safer sex with condoms if they want to receive money from the US.... all of
this due to the religio-fascists who have a strangle hold on that jerk in
office.

Regarding the presidential candidates.... Obama is far from perfect, but
compared to McCain.... someone who employs the same people who Bush used to
trash him in the 2000 election, who employs people who supposedly know
something about economics (Graham's PhD) who don't have a clue about the
level of pain felt by ordinary US citizens, who employs people who were
vocal supports of Jack Abramoff (who's sitting in prison convicted of
fraud), who was reprimanded himself over the Keating scandal (using very
poor judgement), who promotes this "family values" crap, while having a
somewhat less than stellar fidelity problem of his own (not just divorcing
his first wife when she was disabled, but cheating on her during their
marriage). Sure, McCain was a war hero. Nothing bad about that. He served
honorably, but for him to sit there and tell us that this qualifies him to
make good decisions is just plain dumb. He's been in the Senate for decades
and should have known better about Iraq. He used to be opposed to torture,
e.g., waterboarding, something used during the Spanish Inquisition to
torture people into false confessions, but he's ok with it now. He used to
be pro-choice, now his anti-choice, etc., etc.

Sorry for the rant, but you asked! LOL

Very well put Jonathon,

The most important part of democracy is not just the voting and being
enabled to vote, but the obligation on those voters to question,
examine and maintain a watch on those people elected and their
actions.

Having listened to a number of American citizens over the years
regurgitating (perhaps not quite the right word) their stand on
democracy and that the US is the only country with the only proper
form of it, I cannot help but wonder if perhaps a course on critical
political examination or ethics should not be included in schools.

I believe that, without such self examination and scrutiny, the
inculcation of democracy is little more than brainwashing akin to that
practiced in the Third Reich. It sounds like that from those that I
have heard and that is the danger that can easily lead to tyranny.
History has several examples of how various forms of government by
citizens evolved into oligarchies and tyrannies due to the complacency
and uniformedness of those charged with electing their
representatives.

That is why I find your words refreshing.

Thank you.

Peter

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:27:46 -0700, Capt. JG wrote:

Tell us how you really feel! (And, fix your typos... we wouldn't want
Dave to get too upset)

what typos?...I'm Canadian. We don't make typos.