On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 21:57:55 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 01:16:14 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 1 Aug 2005 10:48:39 -0700, wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

Every major legislative initiative
signed by the president this year has been a boon to special interests,
but ignored the real needs of the American people.
Name one 20th President who has not catered to "special" interests?

Betcha can't.

make that 20th Century President - sorry. :)


It seems as if virtually every Bill Bush signs is a payoff to interests
that do not have the health, welfare, or employment of average Americans
in mind, more so than any other POTUS in my memory.

And that's different from, oh say, Carter who was so incompetent that
he drove the American economy into the ground so hard so fast it took
almost ten years to recover from that mess.

Or Clinton's administration allowing for funky accounting practices
like EBITDA and a SEC that was too lax creating the tech investment
bubble which gave rise to ERON (most of ENRON's fraud occurred during
the Clinton administration - check out any time line you wish).

My point is that every President is prey to charges of favoritism to
his buddies or contributors. They all help their friends.

And today, I heard a report that Bush wants public schools to start
teaching creationism hocus-pocus, and that he's still against expanding
stem cell research.

It's called Intelligent Design and I agree with you on that one. As
to stem cell research, I'm still a little leery of adding more lines
to the research system. I understand from a pragmatic standpoint that
you might as well use the materials that are going to waste anyway,
but it still isn't something that I've reconciled with myself yet.

So I guess, in a sense, I'm sort of with the Prez on this one. :)

When his time in office finally ends, it'll take us years and years to
make up for Bush's Dark Ages.

I don't think it's that bad Harry - I mean really... :)

And today, I heard a report that Bush wants public schools to start
teaching creationism hocus-pocus, and that he's still against expanding
stem cell research.


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
It's called Intelligent Design and I agree with you on that one.

Really? I though you were proclaiming a while back that evolution had
never been "proven" and it shouldn't be taught as science?

... As
to stem cell research, I'm still a little leery of adding more lines
to the research system. I understand from a pragmatic standpoint that
you might as well use the materials that are going to waste anyway,
but it still isn't something that I've reconciled with myself yet.

So I guess, in a sense, I'm sort of with the Prez on this one. :)

Sorry, but you're putting yourself into the garbage can on this one. You
can't drive science backwards, attempts to try are disastrous on all
fronts. Go burn some witches if it makes you feel better.

DSK


When his time in office finally ends, it'll take us years and years to
make up for Bush's Dark Ages.


I don't think it's that bad Harry - I mean really... :)

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 07:29:02 -0400, DSK wrote:

And today, I heard a report that Bush wants public schools to start
teaching creationism hocus-pocus, and that he's still against expanding
stem cell research.


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
It's called Intelligent Design and I agree with you on that one.

Really? I though you were proclaiming a while back that evolution had
never been "proven" and it shouldn't be taught as science?

No - that's not what that discussion was about.

~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.

... As
to stem cell research, I'm still a little leery of adding more lines
to the research system. I understand from a pragmatic standpoint that
you might as well use the materials that are going to waste anyway,
but it still isn't something that I've reconciled with myself yet.

So I guess, in a sense, I'm sort of with the Prez on this one. :)

Sorry, but you're putting yourself into the garbage can on this one. You
can't drive science backwards, attempts to try are disastrous on all
fronts. Go burn some witches if it makes you feel better.

To begin with, you had no call to make an assertion such as that
without exploring the issue at a more in-depth level. It shows that
you are only capable of name calling on limited evidence and even more
limited discussion.

Second, the President wants to limit adding embryonic stem cells from
frozen embryos to the current 78 lines currently in existence. In
that, I am in agreement. My reasoning is that there are clear and
compelling moral and ethical issues in destroying potential human
beings for the sake of research that needs to be explored and
reconciled before moving into the destruction of same.

Third, the current 78 lines have shown no, and I will repeat this for
your edification, no evidence that these lines will do anything to
effect or affect any current debilitating disease as was originally
claimed. While there are some arguably positive results in current
testing and research on these 78 lines, they are minor at best. Like
taking Sudafed for allergies. The length of time, money and
investment in those 78 lines has done nothing to add to the quality of
life.

Fourth, I am not against science or research in this area at all. On
the contrary, it would be nice if somebody could create a cure for
rheumatoid arthritis which cripples me on a regular basis based on
stem cell research.

However, there is a ready source of stem cells at abortion clinics,
which is the law of the land even if I don't agree with it, which can
be used are just as valuable if I understand the biology correctly.
There is no need to destroy frozen embroyos to obtain stem cells.

Fifth, adult stem cells are showing more promise in the potential
cures of paralysis and disease cure than embryonic stem cells. It's
pretty easy to get adult stem cells - doesn't even hurt. The jury is
still out on these types of stem cells, but the early research is
showing great promise.

To put paid to this, next time you name call, be a man about it and
try to understand first - as hard as that may be for you to do.

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.


Pass me that can opener... oh no... worms everywhere.

A small clarification: Nothing in science is taken as gospel. Every
conclusion is tentative and subject to revision should sufficient
refuting evidence arise.

-rick-

ps. I still don't know exactly what you expect or mean by direct link.

-rick- wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.


Pass me that can opener... oh no... worms everywhere.

A small clarification: Nothing in science is taken as gospel. Every
conclusion is tentative and subject to revision should sufficient
refuting evidence arise.

-rick-

ps. I still don't know exactly what you expect or mean by direct link.

Speaking of worms...anyone else remember the great Jean Shepherd's
routine about worms?

On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 02:19:03 GMT, Harry Krause
wrote:

-rick- wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.


Pass me that can opener... oh no... worms everywhere.

A small clarification: Nothing in science is taken as gospel. Every
conclusion is tentative and subject to revision should sufficient
refuting evidence arise.

-rick-

ps. I still don't know exactly what you expect or mean by direct link.

Speaking of worms...anyone else remember the great Jean Shepherd's
routine about worms?

Haven't heard it in years.

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 19:09:31 -0700, -rick- wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.


Pass me that can opener... oh no... worms everywhere.

A small clarification: Nothing in science is taken as gospel. Every
conclusion is tentative and subject to revision should sufficient
refuting evidence arise.

Ah, so you are willing to admit that Aliens MIGHT have been the cause
of the missing link? :)

You know, it's kind of funny. I was heavily involved in quantum
physics for a lot of years and the more I thought I knew, the less I
understood.

Just the way it goes.

ps. I still don't know exactly what you expect or mean by direct link.

Keep the worms in the can rick. :)

How you been man - haven't seen a post from you in a while.

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 19:09:31 -0700, -rick- wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:


~~rick~~ and I were having some fun with the concept of evolution -
his took Darwin and evolution as gospel and I pointed out that a
direct link between protohumans and homo sapiens didn't exist and that
I believed that the cause of the leap from proto to sapiens were
aliens.

The whole thing was tongue in cheek on both sides.


Pass me that can opener... oh no... worms everywhere.

A small clarification: Nothing in science is taken as gospel. Every
conclusion is tentative and subject to revision should sufficient
refuting evidence arise.


Ah, so you are willing to admit that Aliens MIGHT have been the cause
of the missing link? :)



If you have another explanation for some of the pondscum on this planet,
I am willing to listen.

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Keep the worms in the can rick. :)

How you been man - haven't seen a post from you in a while.


Great, mostly busy working and boating.

-rick-

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Ah, so you are willing to admit that Aliens MIGHT have been the cause
of the missing link? :)

Absolutely, but what's missing?

-rick-