On 9-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

branch of biology that deals with the form and structure of animals and
plants b : the form and structure of an organism or any of its parts

I don't see the word "size" or "dimension" anywhere in here.
Biometry is specifically related to measurements and the statistical
analysis of such.

Size is a part of "form and structure." Without size, there is no form or
structure. Form and structure have size. Thus, you're proven wrong again.

You prove nothing. Two items can have the same form and yet be different
sizes - that's what scale is all about.

I see no discussion of any of the subjects you claim. I see only a book
title.

That's what references are all about, dickhead. You have to read the
pages referenced in the book. I know that represents a serious difficulty
for you, since your reading skills are so poor, but that's life.

Except that you have elided the context, which clearly indicated that we
were discussing the precursors of homo sapien.

Bull**** again. You won't quit until you've proved you're a pathological
liar. Here's the preceding section:

If nothing else, the average height of humans has increased
substantially in recorded history.

There you go inventing your own version of morphology. Stick with
the facts - height variation occurs _within_ morphological similarity.

And then there's the change to upright gait...

The only species of human are H. sapiens. You are still full of ****.

Um...make me.

Coward.

Well, I'm sure you'd be happy to misquote me again...

Again? When have I misquoted you? Provide proof, dickhead.

It reamins that you are consistently lying and refuse to provide any
substantive proof of your ridiculous claims. You will say anything
and don't give a damn for facts.

Mike

On 9-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

So, his civil rights have not been violated because we are at war and he is
not entitled to a writ of habeus corpus.

What a pile of bull****. The law allows the restriction of civil rights
because it's the law. I'm glad that idiots like you never get to write
laws and constitutions.

You only care about the status quo and your own sorry little ass. Your
pretense of concern for rights is just like everything else about you
- a lie.

Mike

On 9-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

What, precisely, is its purpose?

The purpose of gun registration is to allow politicians to pretend
that they are doing something useful and to allow many people to
get a false sense of security that something is being done to
protect them. Unfortunately, registration does nothing to prevent
the spread of illegal guns.

Mike

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink opines:
==============
Do you see any difference between these statements of Old vs. New,
and
what that implies? What is the status of the Old Testament today, and
what is this New Testament all about! I ask the last question, to
check
the depth of your philosophy, sort of like a dipstick on the engine
to
check the oil. It does not change the status of the engine, but you
have an idea of its condition.
================

I'll ignore your "dipstick" comment GRIN.

Hey, when it comes to OT, NT, Koran, et al, I'm running on empty. So
now that you know the status, how about some of the better-known
examples of NT boogey-man stuff (or OT warm fuzzies). I say
better-known because I'd at least like to occasionally be able to
say,
"Hey, I've heard of that!" You're going to have to relate to me at a
pretty simplistic level.

But, be forewarned, just as the JW's at my doorstep are forewarned,
I'm
not coming over to your side so long as you've got a mythical deity
on
your squad. OK?

frtzw906

Regret that I was not able to get back to you more last night, but I
was beat, and kept falling asleep at the 'puter!

I don't know that I expected you to come over to my squad. I thought
you were asking what my squad is all about; you were being honest,
intellectual, curious! If I was mistaken in my understanding of any of
these things about you, I apologize, and am open for you to clarify
your reasons for entertaining this discussion.

However, interestingly your statement about keeping it simple, bring us
back to to where we started. "God loves you!" That is as simple and as
sublime as it gets. You can say, you don't believe in God! Ok, that
does not change anything, He still "Loves you!" No matter what you
protest, object, evade, deny, obtuse, parse,too smart, too simple,
think-you-are-cute, mean, nasty, hateful, unloved, and unloveable; my
answer is always the same, "God Loves you."

That for sure makes it simple on me, I don't have to memorize a bunch
of arguments or proof scriptures. I don' have to convince you of
anything to to try and win you to my squad. That is not my
responsibility. That is why the word "prosyletize" is not applicable,
why I am not talking about religion. And why even a child can know what
I am talking about! Though the smartest men in the world, have stumbled
over this cornerstone!

As far as being able to accomadate your "Hey I've heard of that" list,
I have yet to see your list. So it is difficult to know what you have
heard of, or as you say "better known examples." If you had something
specific in mind, let me know and I will see if I can enlighten you.


Tnt, and know that God Loves you!

"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...
On 9-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

What, precisely, is its purpose?

The purpose of gun registration is to allow politicians to pretend
that they are doing something useful and to allow many people to
get a false sense of security that something is being done to
protect them. Unfortunately, registration does nothing to prevent
the spread of illegal guns.

Mike

I don't understand how the registry ever got understood as some sort of
superhero that would dive in front of bullets.

It's just a list that matches names with numbers. It is not useless, it just
has a much more limited purpose than is commonly discussed, and there's no
way maintaining a list has to cost so much. They should have given the
contract to the private company that does the vehicle licensing in Ontario.

"Nisarel" wrote in message
news:1110478066.52fcf97ec98b72e6227d97a89b5b0f96@t eranews...
Scott Weiser wrote:

Funny, I haven't noticed any substantial impairment to my freedoms.

That's because you are not particularly intelligent or perceptive.

LOL! I just spit on my keyboard. Second time this week. Fortunately, once
again, I was only drinking club soda, so aside from some minor salt erosion,
I don't expect major problems to result.

KMAN says:
=============
a.. A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether
religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each
individual and not simply accepted on faith. ...

....
g.. A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas,
good
will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world
for
ourselves and our children.
==============

Great! Then I are one.

frtzw906

KMAN wrote:
"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Tink asks of KMAN:
=====================
So, would you describe yourself as an atheist, agnostic, humanist?
===================

Can one be an atheist and a secular humanist at the same time?

frtzw906

I think so...

What Is Secular Humanism?
Secular Humanism is a term which has come into use in the last thirty
years
to describe a world view with the following elements and principles:

a.. A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether
religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each
individual and not simply accepted on faith.
b.. Commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence, and

scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in
seeking
solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
c.. A primary concern with fulfillment, growth, and creativity for
both
the individual and humankind in general.
d.. A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding
that new
knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of
it.
e.. A concern for this life and a commitment to making it
meaningful
through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our
intellectual and
artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
f.. A search for viable individual, social and political principles
of
ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human
well-being
and individual responsibility.
g.. A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas,
good
will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world
for
ourselves and our children.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/intro/what.html

Frtwz and KMAN, can I assume that you are both comfortable with this
definition, and willing to identify yourself as a Secular Humanist,
atheist with no need for the imaginary mystical creation of men's mind
called God? TnT

BCITORGB wrote:
KMAN says:
=============
a.. A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether
religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each
individual and not simply accepted on faith. ...

...
g.. A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas,
good
will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world
for
ourselves and our children.
==============

Great! Then I are one.

frtzw906

We posted past each other, and I just got your "I are one." I'll give
KMAN a chance to respond as well. TnT

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
KMAN says:
=============
a.. A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether
religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each
individual and not simply accepted on faith. ...

...
g.. A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas,
good
will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world
for
ourselves and our children.
==============

Great! Then I are one.

frtzw906

Heh. It's hard to say "I don't want that!" isn't it?