----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 8:59 AM Subject: pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 #367
> ------------------------------ > > Content-Type: text/plain > > pentax-discuss-d Digest Volume 03 : Issue 367 > > Today's Topics: > Re: Just what does it take to be rem [ frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: CAVEMAN WINS! CAVEMAN WINS! CAVE [ frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: websites with and without www [ "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: websites with and without www [ jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: OT: websites with and without ww [ jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > RE: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re [ "Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: PUG Comments [ jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > RE: the first pentax screwmount shot [ "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: (Fwd) Re: Got a little pentax ^_ [ "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Household items to use as test s [ "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pe [ "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: websites with and without ww [ "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: websites with and without ww [ "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > RE: OT: websites with and without ww [ "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re [ Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Hello and lots and lots "for sale" [ Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > PZ-1p and Prom Pix [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re [ Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Hello and lots and lots "for sal [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re [ Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re [ Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > Re: Hello and lots and lots "for sal [ jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > Re: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pe [ "Butch Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 09:25:11 -0400 > From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Just what does it take to be removed from this list I have tried > everything??????? > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi, EktarEd, > > I assume you've gone here: > > http://www.pdml.net/dbrewer/p2.html > > and followed these instructions: > > "To unsubscribe from the mailinglist, simply send a message with the > word > 'unsubscribe' in the Subject: field to the > -request address of that list > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: unsubscribe > > To unsubscribe from the digest, write a email > like this: > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: unsubscribe > Done! " > > If so, you're stuck here forever. You'll never go away. Or, to be more > accurate, ~we'll~ never go away. Or, you could try it again. Failing > that, "kill file" > > regards, > frank > > EktarEd wrote: > > > Subject says it all. This is real annoying at best ! > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The > pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 09:39:07 -0400 > From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: CAVEMAN WINS! CAVEMAN WINS! CAVEMAN WINS... > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I hear that after a 6 pack, the whole world takes on a warm fuzzy out-of-focus > quality. But if your local beer seller is out, you'll have to wait a while - > supply problems from one of their distributors, probably nothing until August > (they keep pushing the date back...) <g> > > -frank > > Steve Larson wrote: > > > So, is Pentax beer any good? ;) Great shot BTW! > > Steve Larson > > Redondo Beach, California > > > > -- > "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist > fears it is true." -J. Robert > Oppenheimer > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:45:24 -0400 > From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: websites with and without www > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > when you buy a domain name, you get all subdomains. www is a convention that people who create web servers are supposed to use. it is not enforced. someone that owns a domain has to provide either themselves or through their web site hosting service a nameserver that resolves anything before the domain name. people who put up their own servers tend to be more sloppy about setting up their private DNS to provide the initial resolution of everything inside their subdomain. www.domainname.com is a different subdomain than domainname.com, but only the nameserver belonging to domainname.com can alias the two. everyone else just believes what they are told by the domain name server. the convention extends to other Internet protocols too. ftp, smtp and pop3 are ones where the common domain names are ftp.domainname.com, smtp.domainname.com, and pop3.domainname.com to indicate the subdomains you can connect to with their available Internet protocols. > > Herb... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jerome" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 09:29 > Subject: OT: websites with and without www > > > > I've searched the web, but have not come up with an answer to my satisfaction > > just yet. Perhaps you can help. > > > > Why do some sites have www.domainname.com, and others just domainname.com > > (without the "www")? But more to the point, sometimes typing in domainname.com > > will retrieve the site while adding the three w's will cause failure. whats up > > with that? I couldn't imagine that one person could own the domain name with > > the dubya's and another without. I suspect that the "problem" deals moreso with > > the server than domain registration... but perhaps I'm wrong. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:49:57 -0400 > From: jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: websites with and without www > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Thanks, Herb. Good explanation. Understood. > > - jerome > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:42:46 -0400 > From: jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: websites with and without www > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Okay... even more specifically, I understand that Whether or not a site is > accessible without the preceding www depends on its DNS [domain name system] > setup. The better question is, how can this be changed? out of my hands? up to > the host? etc... > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:59:40 +0100 > From: "Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Frank Theriault wrote: > > >I'm not a Sci Fi fan at all. I'm even less of a Star Trek fan (sorry, > guys), so > >I haven't been following this thread at all. But, I did read your post, > Butch, > >and you do pose some interesting questions, to which I have a few random > >thoughts. > > I enjoy Star Trek as pure 'escapism', at the end of a bad day dealing with > life at the start of the 21st Century! > > I have quite a few issues with it though: > > Knowing how you feel in a Ferrari giving it some welly from 0 to 60 mph, you > feel pushed back in the seat - 0 to 186000 miles per second and multiples > thereof would atomise you; > > I can't believe that all intelligent life forms will be carbon based or look > like us; > > Seeing that some light takes hundreds/thousands + years to arrive to Earth, > even if you had the capability to travel much faster than light, there is no > guarantee these star systems would still exist when you travelled to them; > > I agree with Keith of the possibility and that an alien species who found us > (and therefore far more technically advanced) would be benevolent and (my > comment) might look at our planet as useful resources, or us as food > <gulp!>. With Voyager, we have even sent our address! > > Of course, we only have a limited time to develop or evolve enough to > explore the galaxies - although a long time away the Sun has a finite > existence, so we will have to become travellers....or casualties. > > Anyway... > > Hello to all and sorry to hear about Glenn and Frank's misfortunes. I hope > the thief who stole the bag gets what's coming to him. > > I have had the opportunity to borrow a digital camera and the appeal to > immediately see what you have taken or modify the shot on computer is > compulsive. I am still hanging in for a look at the D*ist, even though it > has been put back to August for availability. I came within 12 meters of my > first film scanner. Whilst being delivered, the driver on top of the tail > lift on the truck thought his friend on the road had it, and he thought the > driver had it. It made a very expensive noise on landing on the road. It was > a sale item too, so no replacement, but they made no fuss about liability or > refund. > > I found last week I had a day to myself and took the camera (LX) into the > forest for some pictures of my town from the top of the hill. The weather > has been very hot but a bit overcast here at times and I normally rush to > take what I want. This time when it went overcast, I relaxed and read a book > until the light was perfect again - I can't wait to see the result of that > film. > > Regards to all, > > Malcolm > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:00:59 -0400 > From: jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: PUG Comments > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Thanks, Frank. > > I agree with your critique on all accounts; especially those about the image > looking very ordinary at any other angle (trust me, I have the shots to prove > it). It's funny because I had passed that wall for over 5 years [it's across > the street from my office] before it ever said anything to me... until I passed > it that day and it whispered "make me a star!". As for the title, yep, it's a > real word. Maybe the longest one I know how to spell, in fact <g>. Guess it's > the mathematician in me trying to sneak out. > > - jerome > > > > "Perpendicularity" by Jerome Reyes: > > > > Wins this month's award for best invented word <vbg>. It may be a real > > word, but it looks invented to me! Seriously, this may be my favourite > > from this month. I just love finding interesting patterns in everyday > > things - I'm not good at it, but you nailed this one, Jerome. How > > ordinary would this have looked had you not tilted your camera 45 > > degrees? It makes the pipes and brick pattern somehow "mesh" into one > > another in a way that just wouldn't have happened had you left the > > camera in it's usual horizontal or vertical planes. Astounding. > > Thanks! > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:11:52 -0400 > From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: the first pentax screwmount shot on digital?????? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > I missed (and erased) the beginnning of this thread. What's the body > being used? > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:02:14 -0400 > From: "Daniel J. Matyola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: Got a little pentax ^_^ > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Not cool at all! > > Katrin wrote: > > > the ad in germany is with a empty box of cigarettes... and > > somehow I think that's not so cool... bye Katrin > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:07:59 -0400 > From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Household items to use as test subject for MACRO? > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > Put the lens on the camera, and scan the kitchen counters, etc. You'll > find neat shots and be inspired to do spring cleaning. > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:27:17 -0400 > From: "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned > into Star Trek Thread) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > Sci. Am had a special section on this a while back. (July 2000) My > favorite arguemnt involves assuming that a tehcnoogocial species arises, > sends one colony ship out at 0.1 c, it takes 400 years for that colonoy > to send out another ship, etc. Making these estimates, the entire > galaxy should be colonized in about 5 million years, whihc is a blink of > the eye in cosmic terms. So where are they? > You then get into "intelligent but no tech", deliberately avoiding us, > etc. A good read if you like this stuff. > > > Steven Desjardins > Department of Chemistry > Washington and Lee University > Lexington, VA 24450 > (540) 458-8873 > FAX: (540) 458-8878 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:40:28 -0400 > From: "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: OT: websites with and without www > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi Jerome, > > On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:29:59 -0400, jerome wrote: > > > I couldn't imagine that one person could own the domain name with > > the dubya's and another without. I suspect that the "problem" deals moreso with > > the server than domain registration... but perhaps I'm wrong. > > Whoever owns "domain.com" also owns "www.domain.com" and > "ftp.domain.com" and "sex.domain.com" and > "anything-else-you-want.domain.com". Domain registrations are > hierarchical. > > The difference between having to use "www.domain.com" and "domain.com" > lies in how the owner of the domain has it listed in the DNS of the > ".com" registrar and whether they run a local DNS for "domain.com" (or > their hosting provider does). > > The domain owner has to have "domain.com" listed in the DNS database of > the ".com" registrar, since that's the way things work. The name > server for "domain.com" then can provide mappings for "www...", > "ftp...", etc., but doesn't have to. If they do, you can use > "www.domain.com". > > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:41:36 -0400 > From: "Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: OT: websites with and without www > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:42:46 -0400, jerome wrote: > > > Okay... even more specifically, I understand that Whether or not a site is > > accessible without the preceding www depends on its DNS [domain name system] > > setup. The better question is, how can this be changed? out of my hands? up to > > the host? etc... > > You could put "www.domain.com" in your HOSTS file, but you'd not be > able to access it this way if the IP address of the "domain.com" server > ever changes. At least until you updated your HOSTS file. You can > also run a local DNS server, but with the same risk. Other than that, > it's out of your hands. > > TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:42:59 -0400 > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: OT: websites with and without www > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I registered my domain about a year ago as jcoconnell.com > but if you type www.jcoconnell.com it works just the same. > I didnt pay extra for that feature or domain. > JCO > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: jerome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 9:43 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: OT: websites with and without www > > > > > > Okay... even more specifically, I understand that Whether or not > > a site is > > accessible without the preceding www depends on its DNS [domain > > name system] > > setup. The better question is, how can this be changed? out of my > > hands? up to > > the host? etc... > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:52:16 -0400 > From: Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > On June 1, 2003 07:56 am, Keith Whaley wrote: > > I just did look it up. Thanks. > > > > http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/SETI/drake_equation.html > > > > Redoing the existing formula's default parameters to some a bit less > > optimistic, I come up with 200 possible communicating life forms within > > OUR galaxy... The downloaded formula says 2400. I'm less optimistic. > > > I'm actually of the view the Drake equation is too pessimetic. It's too > human. Counting only plants like Earth. The real question is why would they > want to talk to us. > > Nick > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 16:53:01 +0200 > From: Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: PDML <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Hello and lots and lots "for sale" > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hello everybody, > > I guess that this is a "message from the great beyond"... > > First of all, please visit http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/for_sale/items/ in > order to see my long list of items for sale. I will wait for 10-14 > days, and will then sell all remaining items on eBay. Feel free to > group items together and to make me offers, but please remain > realistic. The list contains lenses, bodies, lots LX accessories, > manuals, cases, hoods, etc. > > Otherwise, what's been happening with me? It has been a couple of > months since I started my Canon excursion. At first it was just an > experiment and a protest against Pentax's recent product releases: > - *ist camera incompatible with K/M lenses, > - FAJ lenses, > - possibility of *ist D not supporting K/M lenses, > - still no USM technology, > - still no IS technology > - still no DSLR, > - ... > > At present Canon EOS is my primary system, and since I cannot afford to > own two systems, I am selling off my Pentax gear. This is a sad event, > but I am convinced (internally, for me) that whatever products Pentax > might release, I will be able to get equivalents from Canon, and I > (personally) will not regret my move. Yes, I know, it is like voting > for Microsoft and joining the Big bad Brother, but I do not feel that it > is MY job to save Pentax. Through the existence and maintenance of the > KMP, I feel that I have done my part. > > So, most of you want to ask, what are my impressions from Canon? Well, > here are the negative sides: > > - Canon's equipment is generally larger and heavier, > - Canon's lens coating is slightly inferior to SMC, > - Canon's non-pro bodies have small viewfinders and no spot-meters. > > On the positive side are things like: > - a complete palette of high-quality products, bodies, lenses, flashes > - undisputed leader in small-format digital photography > - top technology: USM, IS, AF teleconverts > - very high availability of new and used products, generally lower > prices than the competition > > In the end, what does this mean? Well, if Pentax builds the products > that YOU need, then there is no need for YOU to consider another brand. > Pentax products are generally well designed and well built, and > sometimes they are better than the competition. The trouble starts when > Pentax allows gaping holes in their products lines and when they abandon > compatibility with older products. This all bothered me, so I looked > elsewhere. This was my personal decision, and now I do not even look on > eBay any more because I have everything that I need: > > - a small and light film-based kit: EOS 30 (Elan 7e), 24/2.8 + > 28-105/3.5-4.5 > - a serious-amateur film-based kit: EOS 30 (Elan 7e), 20-35/3.5-4.5, > 50/1.8, 100/2.8 Macro, 70-200/4, 400/5.6, external flash > - a serious digital kit: Canon 10D + any Canon lens that I own. > > I am happy, and now that I do not spend so much time on eBay, PDML or > KMP, I have lots of time to go shooting. I ordered the 10D immediately > after I learned that Pentax has delayed the *ist D. Within two hours of > receiving the 10D, I was lucky to shoot the following image: > http://www.bdimitrov.de/private/wood_warbler.jpg I was using the EF > 400/5.6 USM L lens and built-in flash. On the DSLR the lens appears to > be 640/5.6, and the cropped out image covers about 70% of the entire > image. Within an hour of taking the image, I had it touched up in > PainShopPro and printed out. What an amazing experience! > > And in the end, just a warning to those considering the *ist D. > Regardless of how much the body costs, plan on spending twice as much. > You will probably need a MicroDrive or two, extra batteries, a charger, > probably a couple of new lenses, you will need to upgrade your computer, > your printer will NEVER be good enough, and you WILL want to buy > insurance for your new body. So, if you have to collect the last > dollars for the DSLR, then consider waiting for 6 months or so. Not > following this advice will quickly lead you to my situation --- > emergency sale of every piece of non-essential equipment... > > Best wishes to all, > Boz > > -- > WARNING: new e-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... > 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein > ===ooO=(_)=Ooo======================================================= > Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ > ===================================================================== > <__> <__> > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:52:59 EDT > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: PZ-1p and Prom Pix > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Last night was my daughter's High School Senior Prom. I'm an old pro with > the PZ-1, but took out the PZ-1p that Stan sold me. Popped the AF500 flash on > it and proceeded to take pictures of the kids. > > This is the first time that I have tried using the fill flash on the PZ-1p. > Results were great and set-up was simple. I just turned the camera's left > side dial to flash, pressed the dial button down, and turned the thumb wheel to > get -.3 or -.7 stop fill lighting. > > The results are very nice. It was 5 PM, the day had turned sunny, and the > sun was behind the kids. I'll post some scans as I only have drug store prints > right now, but the lighting made fos some classy pictures. > > Regards, Bob S. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:54:20 -0400 > From: Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > On June 1, 2003 08:14 am, Fred wrote: > > > > > I'm not sure I'm so eager to have the universe populated with > > species such as ours (the most dangerous - and easily the most > > destructive - species on this planet we call "ours")... > > > Isn't that why it's "ours"? There is a quote in one of Niven's books > > Something like "How much intelligence does it take to sneak up on a leaf?" > > Nick > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 11:02:09 EDT > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Hello and lots and lots "for sale" > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Boz, > Sad for us to see you go and happy times for you. > The image is indeed impressive! > Thanks for the update. > Regards, Bob S. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > http://www.bdimitrov.de/private/wood_warbler.jpg > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 11:03:52 -0400 > From: Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > On June 1, 2003 10:27 am, Steve Desjardins wrote: > > Sci. Am had a special section on this a while back. (July 2000) My > > favorite arguemnt involves assuming that a tehcnoogocial species arises, > > sends one colony ship out at 0.1 c, it takes 400 years for that colonoy > > to send out another ship, etc. Making these estimates, the entire > > galaxy should be colonized in about 5 million years, whihc is a blink of > > the eye in cosmic terms. So where are they? > > You then get into "intelligent but no tech", deliberately avoiding us, > > etc. A good read if you like this stuff. > > > My feeling is when the next door neigbour is 4+ light years away you're > aren't going for a cup of sugar. At 1/10 of light it's 40+ years each > way. Ignoring speeding up and slowing down. That's next door. > > Now lets say they have come. Say 100 years ago a ship showed up. Took out > there disposable camera. Took pictures of all the tourists things. Left some > graffiti on a wall. Ticked Earth off the list of things to do before they > die. Are we ever going to know they've been here? > > Nick > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:56:55 -0400 > From: Nick Zentena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > On June 1, 2003 08:19 am, frank theriault wrote: > > > > > First, one of the things that pisses me off about much sci fi that has to > > do with ET's is that aliens always bear such a striking resemblence to us! > > Cheaper to slap green make up on your local out of work actor then to come up > with something more complicated. > > > But that's only really true of TV/Movie Sci-fi. When it comes to real Sci-Fi > the aliens are more likely to be alien. > > Nick > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 11:00:06 -0400 > From: jerome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Hello and lots and lots "for sale" > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Quoting Bojidar Dimitrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Within two hours of receiving the 10D, I was lucky to shoot > > the following image: > > http://www.bdimitrov.de/private/wood_warbler.jpg > > wow... so wait... did the warbler come with the camera? <g> very nice image, > Boz! and best of luck with your Canon endeavors. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 11:28:03 -0400 > From: "Butch Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: The problems of E.T. (was Re: pentax smc 15mm A turned into Star Trek Thread) > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Frank wrote; > But, back to the question at hand. I'd say that you're limiting yourself > somewhat, Butch. You're assuming (it seems to me) that in order to be > intelligent, life has to follow a similar evolution to us. Why does all > life > have to be carbon based? Just because we can't imagine any other way? Why > does > all life have to evolve from the sea? Is there no other way to manipulate > materials into tools but with opposable thumbs? > > Yes it is somewhat limiting, though my original thread mentioned space > faring species. My understanding is that next to our intelligence, opposable > thumbs is our most significant evolutionary advantage. If the breakthrough > in physics ever comes that allows us to travel out of our solar system we > may very well find intelligent life looking very different then us. > > The problem with sci-fi depicting alien species as basically humanoid is > strictly marketing. They discovered that the audience related more to them > if they were humanoid. Plus make-up is probably easier<VBG> > > I do agree with the concern that any other space faring species would be no > less aggressive then our own and would result in a major conflict. I also > worry about our tendency to do that and what we would do if we found a less > advanced civilization. Would we repeat the atrocities we did to the > indigenous civilizations that were found in the New World? > > BUTCH > > Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. > > Hermann Hess (Damien) > > -------------------------------- > End of pentax-discuss-d Digest V03 Issue #367 > ********************************************* >
