Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Saltation as an alternative to Punk-eek, other topics (Ed Conrad
59 views
Skip to first unread message
Ted Holden
May 9, 2012, 11:53:31 PM5/9/12
to
I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
denizens would find interesting lives at:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
main page along those lines is this:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
The new material involves a couple of items which are more or less
orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as an
alternative to punk-eek.
Oh, yeah...
| . . , ,
| ____)/ \
(____
| _,--''''',-'/( )
\`-.`````--._
| ,-' ,' | \ _ _ / | `-.
`-.
| ,' / | `._ /\\ //\ _,' | \
`.
| | | `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
|
| ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
`.
| |/' \' `\( \(_)/ )/' `/ `\|
| ` ` V V '
'
Splifford the bat says: Always remember
A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt ideological
doctrines.
to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
denizens would find interesting lives at:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
main page along those lines is this:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
The new material involves a couple of items which are more or less
orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as an
alternative to punk-eek.
Oh, yeah...
| . . , ,
| ____)/ \
(____
| _,--''''',-'/( )
\`-.`````--._
| ,-' ,' | \ _ _ / | `-.
`-.
| ,' / | `._ /\\ //\ _,' | \
`.
| | | `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
|
| ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
`.
| |/' \' `\( \(_)/ )/' `/ `\|
| ` ` V V '
'
Splifford the bat says: Always remember
A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt ideological
doctrines.
Ron O
May 10, 2012, 7:00:24 AM5/10/12
to
On May 9, 10:53 pm, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>
> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
> main page along those lines is this:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>
> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
Is Holden still alive? Someone talking about time to devote to usenet
> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>
> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
> main page along those lines is this:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>
> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
that probably used a 300 baud modem. They say that Hershey is 10
years older than God so anything is possible.
Ron Okimoto
Bob Casanova
May 10, 2012, 2:07:42 PM5/10/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
<liakh...@gmail.com>:
Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
Welcome back!
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
<liakh...@gmail.com>:
Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
Welcome back!
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Bob Casanova
May 10, 2012, 2:09:29 PM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 04:00:24 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ron O
<roki...@cox.net>:
>On May 9, 10:53 pm, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
>> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
>> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>>
>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>>
>> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
>> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
>> main page along those lines is this:
>>
>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>>
>> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
>> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
>> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
>> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
>> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
>> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
>> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
>
>Is Holden still alive?
No, this was a post-interment-post.
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ron O
<roki...@cox.net>:
>On May 9, 10:53 pm, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
>> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
>> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>>
>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>>
>> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
>> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
>> main page along those lines is this:
>>
>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>>
>> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
>> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
>> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
>> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
>> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
>> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
>> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
>
>Is Holden still alive?
Walter Bushell
May 10, 2012, 9:41:28 PM5/10/12
to
In article <am0oq75kbqoe3njf5...@4ax.com>,
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> Welcome back!
s/Lesser Lights/Lesser Darks/
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> Welcome back!
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Ted Holden
May 11, 2012, 11:31:54 AM5/11/12
to
On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here!
Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here!
but there really is some intriguing new info available:
Why humans don't have fur:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
Does the Smithsonian view Abraham Lincoln as an anti-science kook:
http://bearfabrique.org/History/giants.htm
Is Splash Saltation the real explanation for the Cambrian explosion?
Also, which of the claims of Elaine Morgan and Danny Vendramini are
believable and why? What did Neanderthals actually look like
(Vendramini)? What is the relationship between Cro Magnons and the
people of Genesis (racists won't be happy with that one)? Does the
world need a Cro Magnon History Month or something like that?
http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
The Mars image stuff is what it is. I've had people on the
thunderbolts forum calling me names over that but I've gone through
the exercise of downloading ESA images and doing my own brightness/
contrast adjustments (Gimp) to prove to myself that Skipper and others
making those claims weren't crazy, and they're not crazy. I've worked
with steganography and jpeg encoding and have a good enough feel for
what image processing artifacts can and can't do to be comfortable
saying there's no way those Hale crater images could be software
artifacts.
The main missing piece of the puzzle for some of this stuff was Danny
Vendramini's work. Scientists have no problem presenting all other
hominids as glorified apes but the Neanderthal has been a poster child
for kum-bay-ah religion and at least in the past half century has been
presented as if he looked just a bit different from us. Vendramini's
reconstructions are going to affect some of those guys sort of like
one of those left hooks to the liver which Duran used to crumple guys
with occasionally.
www.themandus.org
Ted
Inez
May 11, 2012, 1:39:08 PM5/11/12
to
On May 11, 8:31 am, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here!
>
> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>
> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
>
> If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
> the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
Because they don't want Peta throwing blood on them?
> On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here!
>
> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>
> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
>
> If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
> the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
> Does the Smithsonian view Abraham Lincoln as an anti-science kook:http://bearfabrique.org/History/giants.htm
>
> Is Splash Saltation the real explanation for the Cambrian explosion?
> Also, which of the claims of Elaine Morgan and Danny Vendramini are
> believable and why? What did Neanderthals actually look like
> (Vendramini)? What is the relationship between Cro Magnons and the
> people of Genesis (racists won't be happy with that one)? Does the
Bob Casanova
May 11, 2012, 2:01:10 PM5/11/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:41:28 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
One can be a light *for* the dark as well as a light *in*
the dark. Or whatever...
Ummm, wait a minute; that's wrong. If there's a light in the
dark, the dark runs away and can't be found...
in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
the dark. Or whatever...
Ummm, wait a minute; that's wrong. If there's a light in the
dark, the dark runs away and can't be found...
jonathan
May 12, 2012, 4:13:36 AM5/12/12
to
"Inez" <savagem...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c651c1eb-6086-4a61...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>> The Mars image stuff is what it is. I've had people on the
>> thunderbolts forum calling me names over that but I've gone through
>> the exercise of downloading ESA images and doing my own brightness/
>> contrast adjustments (Gimp) to prove to myself that Skipper and others
>> making those claims weren't crazy, and they're not crazy. I've worked
>> with steganography and jpeg encoding and have a good enough feel for
>> what image processing artifacts can and can't do to be comfortable
>> saying there's no way those Hale crater images could be software
>> artifacts.
>>
two things. One, it appears as blocks or lines as the resolution
breaks up. Two, at that low resolution and quality, these images
become a sort of Rorschach test, people see what they want
to see.
What you're seeing at the bottom of Hale crater are just
things like sand dunes and gullies, the ESA images are only
about ten meter resolution, the much much better HiRise images
are down to 1 meter, almost the quality of a rover. You can
almost see footprints in the sand~
Compare the two images
Low -res ESA Hale Crater
http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2005/084/hale-civ-evidence.htm
HiRise image Hale Crater central bulge
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_012663_1440
Now if you take the link above, and plug it into
the wonderful Hirise viewer below , you can pan
and zoom and /process/ all you like, as if you were
there. Why squint at blocky images, when you
'walk' the surface yourself from one dune or rock
to the next?
Viewer
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/hiview/
People seem to assume the surface of Mars is
analogous to the surface of the Moon, ancient
and unchanged for geologic time. Hardly, Mars
is closer to a frigid version of the American
Southwest or arctic regions. Plenty of ongoing
erosion.
And most lowland areas, crater floors and valleys
and so on, are more like the bottom of dried up
seafloors or lakes, which most were at one time
or another.
For instance, look at the razor flat horizon of
this Opportunity Rover pic, only a body of
water or ice can create that straight-edge horizon.
This was a ...seafloor.
http://areo.info/mer/opportunity/069/1P134310798ESF08AYP2583L5M1_L4L5L5L5L6.jpg
And how long ago was water at that site?
Compare the delicate water erosion patterns seen
in the....shadows....of each of these two pics below.
How long could that erosion pattern last?
Decades or centuries at best?
Look at the....shadows!
Yellowstone mudpot
http://www.nps.gov/features/yell/slidefile/thermalfeatures/mudpots/midwaylower/Images/05402.jpg
Meridiani crater wall
http://marsrover.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/169/1P143185259EFF3221P2397R1M1.HTML
Water flows on Mars....TODAY! See the video
below a couple of clicks down the page.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/flowing-water-mars_n_918860.html
s
jonathan
May 12, 2012, 4:22:03 AM5/12/12
to
"jonathan" <mat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7_GdnfoFi8dIhjPS...@giganews.com...
>
> "Inez" <savagem...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c651c1eb-6086-4a61...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
My post above appears to be quoting Inez, when it should
> "Inez" <savagem...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c651c1eb-6086-4a61...@kw17g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>
be quoting Ted Holden, a cut and past mistake~
Ray Martinez
May 13, 2012, 5:52:34 PM5/13/12
to
On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> Welcome back!
>
Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> Welcome back!
>
the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
thinking camp.
Ray (Christian)
Caranx latus
May 13, 2012, 6:24:36 PM5/13/12
to
On May 13, 5:52 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> > up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> > to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> > following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> > Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> > Welcome back!
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
Apparently you're a loon and confused, Ray.
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
> > up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
> > to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
> > following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
> > Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>
> > Welcome back!
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
<snip>
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:00:05 PM5/13/12
to
moniker from Holden.
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:05:39 PM5/13/12
to
Ray's return is a "godsend". Whew!
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:08:35 PM5/13/12
to
On 05/11/2012 01:39 PM, Inez wrote:
> On May 11, 8:31 am, Ted Holden<liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>>> of the science denialists here!
>>
>> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
>> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>>
>> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
>>
>> If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
>> the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
>
> Because they don't want Peta throwing blood on them?
Nice. But would that be a reason for vampires to wear fur? Get free
> On May 11, 8:31 am, Ted Holden<liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>>> of the science denialists here!
>>
>> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
>> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>>
>> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
>>
>> If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
>> the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
>
> Because they don't want Peta throwing blood on them?
blood donations and attract new victims?
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:03:53 PM5/13/12
to
On 05/13/2012 05:52 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
Hey Ray. Have you finalized your "Case against Tony Pagano"? Good to see
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
you back. Maybe you will attract some of the regulars against the recent
upsurgent troll known as "prawnster". It's like moths to flame.
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:38:16 PM5/13/12
to
damage. Who knows how long a "who actually said what to whom" thread
could go on on a group like this one. Inez doesn't seem to be one to
arbor grudges with an axe but you can't be too careful in your
trimmings. Threads are known to drop their branches on people.
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:39:19 PM5/13/12
to
used to wield a mean chainsaw. Her name was Nell Wright.
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 7:54:23 PM5/13/12
to
On 05/11/2012 02:01 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:41:28 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell<pr...@panix.com>:
>
>> In article<am0oq75kbqoe3njf5...@4ax.com>,
>> Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>
>>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>>
>>> Welcome back!
>>
>> s/Lesser Lights/Lesser Darks/
>
> One can be a light *for* the dark as well as a light *in*
> the dark. Or whatever...
>
> Ummm, wait a minute; that's wrong. If there's a light in the
> dark, the dark runs away and can't be found...
Streetlight bias?
> On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:41:28 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell<pr...@panix.com>:
>
>> In article<am0oq75kbqoe3njf5...@4ax.com>,
>> Bob Casanova<nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>>
>>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>>
>>> Welcome back!
>>
>> s/Lesser Lights/Lesser Darks/
>
> One can be a light *for* the dark as well as a light *in*
> the dark. Or whatever...
>
> Ummm, wait a minute; that's wrong. If there's a light in the
> dark, the dark runs away and can't be found...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect
--
*Hemidactylus*
Roger Shrubber
May 13, 2012, 9:17:20 PM5/13/12
to
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
>
> Since Ted's reappearance has some reminiscent, I recall a regular who
> used to wield a mean chainsaw. Her name was Nell Wright.
Well then recall this as well.
>
> Since Ted's reappearance has some reminiscent, I recall a regular who
> used to wield a mean chainsaw. Her name was Nell Wright.
Nell Wright's sister contacted me(PG)tonight(just after Nell passed)
with some more information. The family wanted,
in lieu of flowers, donations sent to either:
The American Diabetic Association
434 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, NC 27601
or to Mastiff Rescue at
MCOA-Mastiff Rescue
http://www.mastiff.org/MCOARESCUE.htm
*Hemidactylus*
May 13, 2012, 9:47:16 PM5/13/12
to
witty person.
Holden was from well before my time. I think Pat James adapted his
Splifford bat. I haven't seem Pat post here for some time either.
And who could forget Jonathan Stone and Marty Fouts battling with Stew
Dean ad nauseum. Or the Schlafly brothers.
--
*Hemidactylus*
Kermit
May 14, 2012, 12:20:01 PM5/14/12
to
On May 11, 8:31 am, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 2:07 pm, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here!
>
> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>
> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
From the link:
>
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> > appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
> > <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
> > of the science denialists here!
>
> Not able to be back on any sort of a regular basis at this juncture,
> but there really is some intriguing new info available:
>
> Why humans don't have fur:http://bearfabrique.org/History/furcoats.htm
"THAT would be the one really big edge to losing the fur coat and
naturally you'd only ever see it on a creature which handled fire."
Haha! Clever, really! Circus fire eaters do not have beards, for a
reason.
However, for those even more informed, we know that humans were the
running ape as well as the fire using ape. We have numerous
adaptations for running for prolonged periods. E.g. a big butt for
staying upright, bobblehead necks for disconnecting our gaze and brain
from a bouncing body, longer legs and a springy foot which returns
most of our energy, and a *very efficient cooling system. The last one
includes dropping the fur coat. Not only do fire eaters not have
beards, but most joggers do not wear fur coats, especially on the
African Savannah.
>
> If anybody remembers me for anything 100 years from now, it may be as
> the person who finally figured out why humans don't have fur...
>
> Does the Smithsonian view Abraham Lincoln as an anti-science kook:http://bearfabrique.org/History/giants.htm
>
> Is Splash Saltation the real explanation for the Cambrian explosion?
It happened when multicelled critters started to develop hard body
parts. Not only was there a serious arms race as a result, but fossils
started being formed in large numbers for the first time.
> Also, which of the claims of Elaine Morgan and Danny Vendramini are
> believable and why? What did Neanderthals actually look like
> (Vendramini)?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Neanderthal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal
That is, like us, only less adapted to running and more adapted to the
cold and to stabbing big animals with heavy spears.
> What is the relationship between Cro Magnons and the
> people of Genesis (racists won't be happy with that one)?
Europe at first, but now just mean prehistoric modern humans.
> Does the
> world need a Cro Magnon History Month or something like that?http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>
> The Mars image stuff is what it is. I've had people on the
> thunderbolts forum calling me names over that but I've gone through
> the exercise of downloading ESA images and doing my own brightness/
> contrast adjustments (Gimp) to prove to myself that Skipper and others
> making those claims weren't crazy, and they're not crazy. I've worked
> with steganography and jpeg encoding and have a good enough feel for
> what image processing artifacts can and can't do to be comfortable
> saying there's no way those Hale crater images could be software
> artifacts.
>
> The main missing piece of the puzzle for some of this stuff was Danny
> Vendramini's work. Scientists have no problem presenting all other
> hominids as glorified apes but the Neanderthal has been a poster child
> for kum-bay-ah religion and at least in the past half century has been
> presented as if he looked just a bit different from us.
or so years ago. They were our closest relative, although the newly
discovered Denisovans may have been as closely related (and therefore
also probably looked a lot like us.)
> Vendramini's
> reconstructions are going to affect some of those guys sort of like
> one of those left hooks to the liver which Duran used to crumple guys
> with occasionally.
>
> www.themandus.org
>
> Ted
Kermit
Bob Casanova
May 14, 2012, 1:08:22 PM5/14/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 19:54:23 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*
<ecph...@hotmail.com>:
Nope; the fact that dark can't be found in the light is a
strictly physical phenomenon, not a psychological one.
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*
<ecph...@hotmail.com>:
strictly physical phenomenon, not a psychological one.
Bob Casanova
May 14, 2012, 1:11:49 PM5/14/12
to
On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:52:34 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com>:
>On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
>Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
>the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
Yeah, most rational people tend to accept that which they
observe unless the observation is known to be false. And I
realize you exclude yourself from that group.
>The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>thinking camp.
Your analysis of yourself as "straight thinking" is one of
those false observations.
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com>:
>On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
>Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
>the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
observe unless the observation is known to be false. And I
realize you exclude yourself from that group.
>The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>thinking camp.
those false observations.
Dana Tweedy
May 14, 2012, 4:58:08 PM5/14/12
to
On 5/13/12 3:52 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
snip
needs to cover it's garbage better, it's attracting pests.
DJT
snip
>>
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
If Ray has indeed wandered into the "straight thinking camp", that camp
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
needs to cover it's garbage better, it's attracting pests.
DJT
*Hemidactylus*
May 14, 2012, 7:03:09 PM5/14/12
to
--
*Hemidactylus*
*Hemidactylus*
May 14, 2012, 7:04:52 PM5/14/12
to
housepets? Oops, that's a sore point with Ray.
--
*Hemidactylus*
pnyikos
May 14, 2012, 10:38:31 PM5/14/12
to nyi...@math.sc.edu
On May 9, 11:53 pm, Ted Holden <liakhovb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>
> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
> main page along those lines is this:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>
> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
>
> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>
> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
> main page along those lines is this:
>
> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>
> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement regarding
> the relationship between hominids and humans into the world before
> this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody other than
> Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious to me that
> there are major logical problems with that claim as well as with the
> claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common ancestor(TM)".
>
> The new material involves a couple of items which are more or less
> orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
> question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as an
> alternative to punk-eek.
>
> Oh, yeah...
>
> | . . , ,
> | ____)/ \
> | _,--''''',-'/( )
> orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
> question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as an
> alternative to punk-eek.
>
> Oh, yeah...
>
> | . . , ,
> | ____)/ \
> | ,-' ,' | \ _ _ / | `-.
> | ,' / | `._ /\\ //\ _,' | \
> | | | `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
> | ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
> | | | `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
> | ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
> | |/' \' `\( \(_)/ )/' `/ `\|
> | ` ` V V '
> '
>
> Splifford the bat says: Always remember
>
> A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
> Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt ideological
> doctrines.
You need to fix up that image of Splifford. The one in your post is
> | ` ` V V '
> '
>
> Splifford the bat says: Always remember
>
> A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
> Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt ideological
> doctrines.
broken up into many pieces. I tried to fix it up in this reply by
removing some lines, but it still is kind of broken up.
Anyway, nice to see you here again, Ted. Try to put in at least one
more appearance this year.
I was away from Usenet myself for seven years, then returned in
November of 2008 to talk.abortion. Two years later I returned here as
well. On the whole, I think talk.origins has actually improved,
though not by much.
Peter Nyikos
Bob Casanova
May 15, 2012, 3:19:53 PM5/15/12
to
On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:03:09 -0400, the following appeared
That problem is easily overcome:
http://test.anchortex.com/military/night-vision-equipment/night-vision-goggles.htm
http://test.anchortex.com/military/night-vision-equipment/night-vision-goggles.htm
Mark Isaak
May 15, 2012, 10:33:53 PM5/15/12
to
any problem.
(And Ted: Yes, Welcome back!)
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) curioustaxonomy (dot) net
"It is certain, from experience, that the smallest grain of natural
honesty and benevolence has more effect on men's conduct, than the most
pompous views suggested by theological theories and systems." - D. Hume
*Hemidactylus*
May 16, 2012, 8:14:31 AM5/16/12
to
--
*Hemidactylus*
Bob Casanova
May 16, 2012, 11:33:56 AM5/16/12
to
On Tue, 15 May 2012 19:33:53 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Mark Isaak
<eci...@curioustaxonomyNOSPAM.net>:
I doubt he could find his ass with both hands and a Klieg
light.
>(And Ted: Yes, Welcome back!)
--
in talk.origins, posted by Mark Isaak
<eci...@curioustaxonomyNOSPAM.net>:
light.
>(And Ted: Yes, Welcome back!)
--
Bob Casanova
May 16, 2012, 11:34:35 AM5/16/12
to
On Wed, 16 May 2012 08:14:31 -0400, the following appeared
Not me; I only check Google once in a while.
*Hemidactylus*
May 16, 2012, 1:28:00 PM5/16/12
to
a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer? We can only search what we
are consciously aware of via introspection. We search for the keys to
our selves under the streetlight, so to speak. Night vision googles
augment vision, but do they provide the entire picture?
--
*Hemidactylus*
Walter Bushell
May 17, 2012, 5:50:09 AM5/17/12
to
In article <87i7r7t9h85d2b6na...@4ax.com>,
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> >Who is going to wear googles all day?
>
> Not me; I only check Google once in a while.
> --
Besides it's usually not necessary to wear googles during the day.
> >Who is going to wear googles all day?
>
> Not me; I only check Google once in a while.
> --
--
This space unintentionally left blank.
Walter Bushell
May 17, 2012, 5:54:29 AM5/17/12
to
In article <FNydnWQfpPI4fi7S...@giganews.com>,
so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
to physics.
*Hemidactylus* <ecph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
Yes, but the index is not accessible by conscious processes. All our
> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
to physics.
Rolf
May 17, 2012, 8:25:17 AM5/17/12
to
Ray Martinez wrote:
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 May 2012 20:53:31 -0700 (PDT), the following
> On May 10, 11:07 am, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ted Holden
>> <liakhovb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
>> Ted! You're just the person we need to increase the quality
>> of the science denialists here! In fact, your name has come
>> up a few times fairly recently when the conversation turned
>> to "Where are all the quality loons?" nostalgia, usually
>> following some inane post by Tony, Ray or one of the Lesser
>> Lights such as shrimpie or Glenn.
>>
>> Welcome back!
>>
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
Concepts don't exist; they are, well, just concepts. Whereas evolution is a
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
well established fact of life. Without the ability to adapt and evolve, life
would be eextinct on this planet by now. The Earth is not an artifical
garden created for static life; it is and always has been a very turbulent,
unstable environment, forcing life to develop methods for variation and
developmentaø adpatation to the environment. And that would include
evolution - bound to happen whenever required by the conditions. Adapt and
evolve, or diappear from the planet. That's the rules of the game.
So say all us real thinkers. Whereas people basing their worldview on myths
created by ignorant sheepherders instead of rational thought are like brain
amputees, unthinking vegetables.
Rolf, plain and simple, but ...
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
>
> Ray (Christian)
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
>>> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
>>> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>>
>>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>>
>>> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
>>> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
>>> main page along those lines is this:
>>
>>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>>
>>> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
>>> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement
>>> regarding the relationship between hominids and humans into the
>>> world before this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody
>>> other than Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious
>>> to me that there are major logical problems with that claim as well
>>> as with the claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common
>>> ancestor(TM)".
>>
>>> The new material involves a couple of items which are more or less
>>> orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
>>> question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as
>>> an alternative to punk-eek.
>>
>>> Oh, yeah...
>>
>>>> . . , ,
>>>> ____)/ \
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I've recently gone through the exercise of updating bearfabrique.org
>>> to something resembling 20112 standards, and the stuff which t.o
>>> denizens would find interesting lives at:
>>
>>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/index.htm
>>
>>> The main emphasis is on early man and hominids, and the question of
>>> how they got here and of what relationships exist between them. The
>>> main page along those lines is this:
>>
>>> http://bearfabrique.org/History/Prehistory/Prehistory.htm
>>
>>> I'm still a couple of years out from having any meaningful amount of
>>> time to devote to usenet but I want to get my own statement
>>> regarding the relationship between hominids and humans into the
>>> world before this new claim of 4% Neanderthal genes in everybody
>>> other than Africans becomes the standard answer. It seems obvious
>>> to me that there are major logical problems with that claim as well
>>> as with the claim of humans and Neanderthals having a "common
>>> ancestor(TM)".
>>
>>> The new material involves a couple of items which are more or less
>>> orthogonal to questions of evolution vs design; this includes the
>>> question of fur coats as well as the notion of splash saltation as
>>> an alternative to punk-eek.
>>
>>> Oh, yeah...
>>
>>>> . . , ,
>>>> ____)/ \
>>> (____
>>>> _,--''''',-'/( )
>>> \`-.`````--._
>>>> _,--''''',-'/( )
>>> \`-.`````--._
>>>> ,-' ,' | \ _ _ / | `-.
>>> `-.
>>>> ,' / | `._ /\\ //\ _,' | \
>>> `.
>>>>>> `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
>>>>
>>>> ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
>>> `.
>>> `-.
>>>> ,' / | `._ /\\ //\ _,' | \
>>> `.
>>>>>> `. `-( ,\\_// )-' .' |
>>>>
>>>> ,' _,----._ |_,----._\ ____`\o'_`o/'____ /_.----._ |_,----._
>>>>> /' \' `\( \(_)/ )/' `/ `\|
>>>> ` ` V V '
>>> '
>>
>>> Splifford the bat says: Always remember
>>
>>> A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
>>> Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt
>>> ideological doctrines.
>>
>>>> ` ` V V '
>>> '
>>
>>> Splifford the bat says: Always remember
>>
>>> A mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on an evolutionist.
>>> Just say no to narcotic drugs, alcohol abuse, and corrupt
>>> ideological doctrines.
>>
Ted Holden
May 17, 2012, 9:49:43 AM5/17/12
to
On May 12, 4:13 am, "jonathan" <mat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Inez" <savagemouse...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> What you're seeing at the bottom of Hale crater are just
> things like sand dunes and gullies, the ESA images are only
> about ten meter resolution, the much much better HiRise images
> are down to 1 meter, almost the quality of a rover. You can
> almost see footprints in the sand~
Sorry to be slow getting back here, again time is problematical. What
I get from the older ESA Hale crater images, again just adjusting
contrast and brightness, is this:
http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=hale8.jpg
A similar ESA image adjusted for color hues looks like this:
http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=medusa_Ytube1.jpg
Again I've worked with image coding software and I don't see how any
software artifact could produce anything like that.
Thanks for the info on the higher res images, I mean to check them out
when time allows. I HAVE had a look at the HIRISE images of Phobos:
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/images/2008/details/phobos/PSP_007769_9010_IRB_Stickney.jpg
Moons in our system of course are supposed to be made of dirt and
green cheese and what not i.e. they're not supposed to be made of
metallic strakes or reflect light all over the place like that.....
Ted
> "Inez" <savagemouse...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> What you're seeing at the bottom of Hale crater are just
> things like sand dunes and gullies, the ESA images are only
> about ten meter resolution, the much much better HiRise images
> are down to 1 meter, almost the quality of a rover. You can
> almost see footprints in the sand~
Sorry to be slow getting back here, again time is problematical. What
I get from the older ESA Hale crater images, again just adjusting
contrast and brightness, is this:
http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=hale8.jpg
A similar ESA image adjusted for color hues looks like this:
http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=medusa_Ytube1.jpg
Again I've worked with image coding software and I don't see how any
software artifact could produce anything like that.
Thanks for the info on the higher res images, I mean to check them out
when time allows. I HAVE had a look at the HIRISE images of Phobos:
http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/images/2008/details/phobos/PSP_007769_9010_IRB_Stickney.jpg
Moons in our system of course are supposed to be made of dirt and
green cheese and what not i.e. they're not supposed to be made of
metallic strakes or reflect light all over the place like that.....
Ted
jonathan
May 17, 2012, 5:18:05 PM5/17/12
to
"Ted Holden" <liakh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f41923c8-35fc-4fac...@v10g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
> On May 12, 4:13 am, "jonathan" <mat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Inez" <savagemouse...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>
>> What you're seeing at the bottom of Hale crater are just
>> things like sand dunes and gullies, the ESA images are only
>> about ten meter resolution, the much much better HiRise images
>> are down to 1 meter, almost the quality of a rover. You can
>> almost see footprints in the sand~
>
> Sorry to be slow getting back here, again time is problematical. What
> I get from the older ESA Hale crater images, again just adjusting
> contrast and brightness, is this:
>
> http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=hale8.jpg
>
> A similar ESA image adjusted for color hues looks like this:
>
> http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=medusa_Ytube1.jpg
Right, but look at the shape of these dunes nearby Hale crater.
>> "Inez" <savagemouse...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>
>> What you're seeing at the bottom of Hale crater are just
>> things like sand dunes and gullies, the ESA images are only
>> about ten meter resolution, the much much better HiRise images
>> are down to 1 meter, almost the quality of a rover. You can
>> almost see footprints in the sand~
>
> Sorry to be slow getting back here, again time is problematical. What
> I get from the older ESA Hale crater images, again just adjusting
> contrast and brightness, is this:
>
> http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=hale8.jpg
>
> A similar ESA image adjusted for color hues looks like this:
>
> http://s141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/?action=view¤t=medusa_Ytube1.jpg
These 'square' shaped dunes are everywhere in the region.
http://www.uahirise.org/ESP_025137_1430
If you know the cooridinates, using the Hirise viewer
you can magnify and see anything bigger than about
ten feet. You can even see trails small rocks make as they
roll down a hill.
Here's a list of various images in and around Hale crater.
Just put Hale into the Hirise search box.
http://www.uahirise.org/results.php?keyword=hale&order=release_date&submit=Search&page=1
Here's a hi-res image of the Face on Mars.
Use the Hirise viewer to magnify and pan around
http://www.uahirise.org/PSP_003234_2210
Dana Tweedy
May 19, 2012, 4:39:26 PM5/19/12
to
On 5/17/12 6:25 AM, Rolf wrote:
snip
>
>> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>> thinking camp.
>>
>
> Straight thinking, is that the same as the 'clear thinking' of the LDS?
In Ray's case it would be "clear thinking" as on LSD.
DJT
snip
>
>> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>> thinking camp.
>>
>
> Straight thinking, is that the same as the 'clear thinking' of the LDS?
DJT
David Iain Greig
May 20, 2012, 3:35:32 PM5/20/12
to
Ray Martinez <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>
> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> thinking camp.
>
> Ray (Christian)
> thinking camp.
>
Prof. Ray (Christian) Martinez Cladistics of Linear Mentation
John Calvin Chair of in _Gavia_immer_ (in progress)
Unpublished Documentation
Dept. of Exclusionary Theology
University of Ediacara
David Iain Greig
May 20, 2012, 3:37:14 PM5/20/12
to
Ted Holden <liakh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Welcome back Ted (for however long you decide to stay)!
If you run into any posting problems drop me a note, ok?
--D.
--
david iain greig gr...@ediacara.org
moderator, talk.origins sp4 kox
http://www.ediacara.org/~greig arbor plena alouattarum
Welcome back Ted (for however long you decide to stay)!
If you run into any posting problems drop me a note, ok?
--D.
--
david iain greig gr...@ediacara.org
moderator, talk.origins sp4 kox
http://www.ediacara.org/~greig arbor plena alouattarum
chris thompson
May 20, 2012, 7:10:51 PM5/20/12
to
On May 20, 3:35 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
Sigh. Ray got a chair before I was even made an Asst. Prof.?
And my first name really IS Chris.
Oh well.
Chris (Chris) Thompson
And my first name really IS Chris.
Oh well.
Chris (Chris) Thompson
Earle Jones
May 20, 2012, 11:10:50 PM5/20/12
to
In article <cabal-jpbh24$1544$1...@darwin.ediacara.org>,
See them marching!
Everyone is out of step but Ray!
earle
*
> Ray Martinez <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> > the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
> >
> > The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> > thinking camp.
> >
>
> > Ray (Christian)
*
> > Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
> > the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
> >
> > The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
> > thinking camp.
> >
>
> > Ray (Christian)
See them marching!
Everyone is out of step but Ray!
earle
*
Robert Grumbine
May 21, 2012, 7:46:12 AM5/21/12
to
the highest rank is janitor.
--
Robert Grumbine http://moregrumbinescience.blogspot.com/ Science blog
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences
Walter Bushell
May 21, 2012, 9:09:06 AM5/21/12
to
In article <slrnjrkao...@saltmine.radix.net>,
Robert Grumbine <bo...@saltmine.radix.net> wrote:
> Remember the inverted nature of the U. of E. hierarchy -- where
> the highest rank is janitor.
Ah, sort of like the Public Schools in NYC.
> Remember the inverted nature of the U. of E. hierarchy -- where
> the highest rank is janitor.
Roger Shrubber
May 21, 2012, 9:36:58 AM5/21/12
to
Robert Grumbine wrote:
> In article<3c866fe7-415d-40d9...@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, chris thompson wrote:
>> On May 20, 3:35 pm, David Iain Greig<dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>>> Ray Martinez<pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
>>>> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>>>
>>>> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>>>> thinking camp.
>>>
>>>> Ray (Christian)
>>>
>>> Prof. Ray (Christian) Martinez Cladistics of Linear Mentation
>>> John Calvin Chair of in _Gavia_immer_ (in progress)
>>> Unpublished Documentation
>>> Dept. of Exclusionary Theology
>>> University of Ediacara
>>
>> Sigh. Ray got a chair before I was even made an Asst. Prof.?
>>
>> And my first name really IS Chris.
>>
>> Oh well.
>
> Remember the inverted nature of the U. of E. hierarchy -- where
> the highest rank is janitor.
Inverted how? Who has the most keys?
> In article<3c866fe7-415d-40d9...@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, chris thompson wrote:
>> On May 20, 3:35 pm, David Iain Greig<dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>>> Ray Martinez<pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Yourself, Tony, Glen and I am sure Ted too, unlike myself, all accept
>>>> the concept of evolution to exist in nature, Bob.
>>>
>>>> The loons and the confused are in one camp, and I am in the straight
>>>> thinking camp.
>>>
>>>> Ray (Christian)
>>>
>>> Prof. Ray (Christian) Martinez Cladistics of Linear Mentation
>>> John Calvin Chair of in _Gavia_immer_ (in progress)
>>> Unpublished Documentation
>>> Dept. of Exclusionary Theology
>>> University of Ediacara
>>
>> Sigh. Ray got a chair before I was even made an Asst. Prof.?
>>
>> And my first name really IS Chris.
>>
>> Oh well.
>
> Remember the inverted nature of the U. of E. hierarchy -- where
> the highest rank is janitor.
Walter Bushell
May 21, 2012, 1:01:08 PM5/21/12
to
In article <GvOdnd6kNo9rmSXS...@giganews.com>,
I don't know, perchance LSD might straighten out his thinking. Someone
has referred to it as a laxative for the mind.
has referred to it as a laxative for the mind.
Bob Casanova
May 22, 2012, 1:21:27 PM5/22/12
to
On Thu, 17 May 2012 05:54:29 -0400, the following appeared
Good luck with that argument in court: "Physics made me do
it!"
it!"
Walter Bushell
May 23, 2012, 5:27:38 PM5/23/12
to
In article <cninr7hnjekmn39g2...@4ax.com>,
that somethings happen by non physical means. Mayhap supernatural
events are acceptable legally, but in science they are not allowed.
Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2012 05:54:29 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> >In article <FNydnWQfpPI4fi7S...@giganews.com>,
> > *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
> >> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
> >
> >Yes, but the index is not accessible by conscious processes. All our
> >so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
> >processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
> >to physics.
>
> Good luck with that argument in court: "Physics made me do
> it!"
Regardless, we have to say that "Physics made me do it!", or concede
> On Thu, 17 May 2012 05:54:29 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>
> >In article <FNydnWQfpPI4fi7S...@giganews.com>,
> > *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
> >> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
> >
> >Yes, but the index is not accessible by conscious processes. All our
> >so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
> >processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
> >to physics.
>
> Good luck with that argument in court: "Physics made me do
> it!"
that somethings happen by non physical means. Mayhap supernatural
events are acceptable legally, but in science they are not allowed.
Bob Casanova
May 24, 2012, 1:20:10 PM5/24/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:27:38 -0400, the following appeared
but which is also unpredictable other than statistically;
see below.
> Mayhap supernatural
>events are acceptable legally, but in science they are not allowed.
If one considers decisions to be "supernatural" your point
is well taken, and I'd suggest that you campaign for a "no
punishment" policy in all criminal law. In fact, we can do
away with criminal law entirely, since it would be wrong on
all levels to punish anyone for acts over which they have no
control.
If, on the other hand, one considers that decisions *are*
possible, even if they result from a cascade of events
starting at the quantum level, we can continue to hold
people responsible for their actions.
As for me, I have no way to determine which (if either) is
correct, so in the absence of convincing evidence either way
I'd vote to continue what seems to work for society.
in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>In article <cninr7hnjekmn39g2...@4ax.com>,
> Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 May 2012 05:54:29 -0400, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>
>> >In article <FNydnWQfpPI4fi7S...@giganews.com>,
>> > *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
>> >> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
>> >
>> >Yes, but the index is not accessible by conscious processes. All our
>> >so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
>> >processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
>> >to physics.
>>
>> Good luck with that argument in court: "Physics made me do
>> it!"
>
>Regardless, we have to say that "Physics made me do it!", or concede
>that somethings happen by non physical means.
....or that there's something happening which *is* physical,
>In article <cninr7hnjekmn39g2...@4ax.com>,
> Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 May 2012 05:54:29 -0400, the following appeared
>> in talk.origins, posted by Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>:
>>
>> >In article <FNydnWQfpPI4fi7S...@giganews.com>,
>> > *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> But do you have your subconscious indexed to be readily searchable with
>> >> a tool like Spotlight or Windows Explorer?
>> >
>> >Yes, but the index is not accessible by conscious processes. All our
>> >so called conscious processes are results of not so conscious
>> >processes which are results of less conscious processes and so proceed
>> >to physics.
>>
>> Good luck with that argument in court: "Physics made me do
>> it!"
>
>Regardless, we have to say that "Physics made me do it!", or concede
>that somethings happen by non physical means.
but which is also unpredictable other than statistically;
see below.
> Mayhap supernatural
>events are acceptable legally, but in science they are not allowed.
is well taken, and I'd suggest that you campaign for a "no
punishment" policy in all criminal law. In fact, we can do
away with criminal law entirely, since it would be wrong on
all levels to punish anyone for acts over which they have no
control.
If, on the other hand, one considers that decisions *are*
possible, even if they result from a cascade of events
starting at the quantum level, we can continue to hold
people responsible for their actions.
As for me, I have no way to determine which (if either) is
correct, so in the absence of convincing evidence either way
I'd vote to continue what seems to work for society.
*Hemidactylus*
May 24, 2012, 10:57:13 PM5/24/12
to
One can eliminate free will altogether, yet be conservative about it and
maintain the status quo on responsiblity. There's a difference between
conservative eliminativism and revolutionary eliminativism.
See Shaun Nichols "How can psychology contribute to the free will
debate?"
dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~snichols/Papers/PsychFreeWill.pdf
[quote- page 2] According to free will eliminativists, however, the
answer to the substantive question is that we lack the kind of free will we think we have.
On their view, the facts about the world are at odds with the way we think of ourselves.
If this worrying view is correct, then the prescriptive question takes on great significance.
If our folk view of choice is wrong, what is the appropriate response? Should we stop
treating each other as free and morally responsible agents? Revolutionism is the view that
we should overhaul our practices that presuppose free will and moral responsibility.
Conservatism is the view that we should leave practices more or less
untouched. [/quote]
I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
Roger Shrubber
May 25, 2012, 4:36:56 AM5/25/12
to
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
Not sure why I'm bothering to answer you post but, ...
> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
It's worked so far.(the useful fiction)
*Hemidactylus*
May 25, 2012, 11:24:08 AM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 18:06:56 +0930, Roger Shrubber wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>
>> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
>> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
>> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
>
> Not sure why I'm bothering to answer you post but, ...
See, the impulse to reply is outside your conscious awareness thus
> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>
>> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
>> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
>> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
>
> Not sure why I'm bothering to answer you post but, ...
inaccessible via introspection. You have not succumbed to the streetlight
effect.
> It's worked so far.(the useful fiction)
the Holy Spirit. The death of volition should not make much of a dent in
everyday life. Those who realized they are evolved from simpler
beginnings and not specially created have managed just fine.
Roger Shrubber
May 25, 2012, 12:09:18 PM5/25/12
to
*Hemidactylus* wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 18:06:56 +0930, Roger Shrubber wrote:
>
>> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>
>>> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
>>> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
>>> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
>>
>> Not sure why I'm bothering to answer you post but, ...
>
> See, the impulse to reply is outside your conscious awareness thus
> inaccessible via introspection. You have not succumbed to the streetlight
> effect.
Perhaps I should have added ba dum tish (try the veal)
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 18:06:56 +0930, Roger Shrubber wrote:
>
>> *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>>
>>> I'm a free will eliminativist at this point, but not sure if I'm more
>>> conservative or revolutionary. Acting as if free will exists could be
>>> beneficial to the individual and society as a useful fiction.
>>
>> Not sure why I'm bothering to answer you post but, ...
>
> See, the impulse to reply is outside your conscious awareness thus
> inaccessible via introspection. You have not succumbed to the streetlight
> effect.
>> It's worked so far.(the useful fiction)
> Better than the alleged useful fiction of religion, but no more real than
> the Holy Spirit. The death of volition should not make much of a dent in
> everyday life. Those who realized they are evolved from simpler
> beginnings and not specially created have managed just fine.
many individuals. It's also been manipulated by many to hurt
many people but then truths are also manipulated to take advantage
of people too.
0 new messages