Re: Farm subsidies

> Much of New Zealand's pastureland (by no means all) is cleared land, > and that means some of it would have been rainforest, even on the > South Island. Cleared land certainly, before people got here the islands were pretty much covered by native bush tip to tail (excepting the tussocked hi

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there no way to define success in evolutionary terms? Wiki describes > natural selection thus: Over many generations, adaptations occur through a > combination of successive, small, random changes in traits, and natu

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > This seems to me to be a bit like Newtonian v. quantum physics. The former > is fine for gross measurements, the latter for fine ones... and the two > haven't been reconciled. Skipped Physics 101, did you? _

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 8:28 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > This seems to me to be a bit like Newtonian v. quantum physics. The > former > > is fine for gross measurements, the latter for fine ones... and the two > > haven't been reconciled.

Does it lead to the dump, to the dump, to the dump, dump, dump . . . ?

Officials paving California road that plays William Tell Overture ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion > Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 8:33:20 AM > Subject: Re: Science and Ideals. > > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 8:28 AM, John Williams > wrote: > > > Nick Arnett > > > > > > > This seems to me to be a bit like Newtonia

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 8:47 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > I find it sad how many people here speak with great authority about that > which > they obviously do not know. Yes, it is so sad. Almost as sad as the patronizing attitude some folks exhibit when they are certain tha

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Yes, it is so sad. Almost as sad as the patronizing attitude some folks > exhibit when they are certain that most everybody else is an idiot. Yes, that is sad. Especially when combined with the idea that all those idiots must be taken care of by those who thi

Re: Science and Ideals.

John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > realize it when their infallibility is pointed out. Such as this lack of infallibility. I certainly hope this guy doesn't try to force his will on others with mistakes like that! ___ http://www.mccmedia.c

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 9:09 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Yes, it is so sad. Almost as sad as the patronizing attitude some folks > > exhibit when they are certain that most everybody else is an idiot. > > Yes, that is sad. Especially w

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Anyway, I suspect you are trying to cross-pollinate threads here by alluding > to political ideas I expressed elsewhere and implying that they must be > wrong because I misspoke here. I am not implying that anything "must" be wrong, only that some know less th

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 9:35 AM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > We allow mistakes to be pointed here, too. Otherwise, how will those who > think they are qualified to impose their will on others ever find out that > they > never will be? Let's make it a rule! Criticism is most cer

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > May I ask this... you seem to be implying that to impose one's will on > others is wrong. Is that what you would have us believe? I would not presume to tell you what to believe. I rarely know what to believe myself. But one thing I do know is that when people

Re: Farm subsidies

An interesting blog post about sustainability on another island: http://cafehayek.typepad.com/hayek/2008/09/a-letter-inspir.html ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Science and Ideals.

John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But one thing I do know is that when people try to impose their ideals > on me, I feel that I should oppose them. I think this may have a connection to Doug's post. The statement above could perhaps be taken as part of the basis of an ethical system. Someth

Re: Science and Ideals.

On 22/09/2008, at 12:37 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> Is there no way to define success in evolutionary terms? Wiki >> describes >> natural selection thus: Over many generations, adaptations occur >> through a >>

Re: Science and Ideals.

On 22/09/2008, at 2:16 AM, John Williams wrote: > > > John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> realize it when their infallibility is pointed out. > > Such as this lack of infallibility. I certainly hope this guy doesn't > try to force his will on others with mistakes like that! It's possible to

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > You've hit on something that's both profound and irrelevant. Ack! I'll never earn a living this way! Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Science and Ideals.

On 22/09/2008, at 6:36 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Charlie Bell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >> >> You've hit on something that's both profound and irrelevant. > > > Ack! I'll never earn a living this way! Heheh! Seriously, it's a good point you made, but it's

Re: Science and Ideals.

Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > It's possible to tell people they're wrong and point out opposing > views without constantly implying that the other party is in some way > trying to be superior. That is not what I was implying. > It makes for a much friendlier discussion, and > this i

Re: Science and Ideals.

From: "Charlie Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > It's possible to tell people they're wrong and point out opposing > views without constantly implying that the other party is in some way > trying to be superior. It makes for a much friendlier discussion, and > this is a discussion list. > > Charlie. To

Re: Science and Ideals.

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 2:16 PM, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > It's possible to tell people they're wrong and point out opposing > > views without constantly implying that the other party is in some way > > trying to be superior. > > That is n

Science and Ideals.

> Yes, that is sad. Especially when combined with the idea > that all those > idiots must be taken care of by those who think they have > the knowledge > and ability to fix everything, but who obviously do not, > and do not even > realize it when their infallibility is pointed out. you're projecti

New Zealand

> Coincidentally I happen to be a New Zealander > NZ's population is just over 4 million (in a country > 20% larger than the > U.K), we have more like 60 millions sheep currently and not > many of > their pastures were rain forests (only the very North of NZ > is > sub-tropical, mostly we've a temp

For the sake of discussion...

> > We allow mistakes to be pointed here, too. Otherwise, > how will those who > > think they are qualified to impose their will on > others ever find out that > > they > > never will be? Let's make it a rule! > Criticism is most certainly honored in David Brin's > writings, which > implicitly mak

For the sake of discussion...

> > > Yes, it is so sad. Almost as sad as the > patronizing attitude some folks > > > exhibit when they are certain that most everybody > else is an idiot. > > Yes, that is sad. Especially when combined with the > idea that all those > > idiots must be taken care of by those who think they > have

Re: New Zealand

> I met David Lange when I was on a bicycle sojourn in the late 80s. A reflection of New Zealands small size. I too bumped into him while cycling (in my case getting around my home town). He's not the only Prime Minister I've happened across in daily activities. > I was under the impression tha

Re: Science and Ideals.

Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The examples that come to me are things like urging others to vote for the > candidate I believe to be most qualified or urging people to give to certain > charities that believe do good work. Are you being serious here? Do you really think that might be what I

Re: For the sake of discussion...

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Jon Louis Mann wrote: > i'm not ashamed to admit that i make lots of mistakes. does that make > me an idiot? that's how i learn... Well, if that's how you *learn*, you're still open to learning, and if someone is open to learning, they are, IMO, *not* an idiot.

Ideas

> Well, if that's how you *learn*, you're still open > to learning, and if > someone is open to learning, they are, IMO, *not* an idiot. > Julia well, there you are... i learned something else. some of us are human and when the free exchange of ideas turns nasty, and sarcastic, not all of

New Zealand

> I don't know such detail. New Zealand does have > stricter than typical > bio-security laws because of the influence agriculture and > tourism has > on our economy. Among other reasons past attempts by E.U > countries to > denigrate NZs meat industry (in attempts to have it > excluded as > compet

Re: Does it lead to the dump, to the dump, to the dump, dump, dump . . . ?

On Sep 21, 2008, at 8:35 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > Officials paving California road that plays William Tell Overture > > Yup. That's just what America needs: an excuse to drive back and forth over the same stretch of road for no