winsor

The shepherds may change, but the sheep remain sheep.

Hey! I put an emoticon with it! Your write. My bad! That's 'wright.'

Yeah, right. All those 3-letter agencies that operate in secret under the guise of national security are sure to comply What was the difference between the Lusitania and the Zimmermann Telegram? Anyhow, there is nothing new here. Anyone who has read "The Puzzle Palace" should not be even slightly surprised. The surprise would be if they WEREN'T doing these kind of things.

Any of the problems faced by the New World can be traced to Native Americans failing to enforce immigration quotas. Societies that relied on statutory isolation (e.g., the Toronaga Shogunate) often maintained stability, while those who relied on a diverse population (e.g., the Roman Empire) paid the price. I have been to all too many places that were jewels with an homogeneous society, but became shitholes when diverse. YMMV. BSBD, Winsor

I dispute the suggestion that "Bush & Co" lied. In order to lie, one must have some glimmering of what the truth might actually be, and I have seen no indication that that crowd had any idea whatsoever what was or was not true. You are giving that group WAY more credit than it deserves. Hanlon's Razor applies here coming and going. BSBD, Winsor

You give them all free housing while the case is under review. In Kiska. Typical wait time for the case is usually less than 15 months.

I'm not a scientist, but I play one on TV.

My preferred method of suicide has a 100% success rate. Old age.

I'm more on the fence about the window tint issue. Enough cops are actually shot/killed during traffic stops that I think a reasonable argument can be made that they should be able to see what is going on in the car. Also when the tint is too dark it compromises the driver's ability to see clearly, especially at night. Don When you're cool, the sun always shines. I have lightly tinted windows, but it was a Florida car. It is, however, a grandpa machine that no self respecting desperado would have anything to do with.

After Pearl Harbour you still weren't at war with Germany until Germany declared war on the US. Which part of that do you disagree with? I don't really disagree with it. But if Germany hadn't declared war on us first, we would have ended up doing it eventually. My point was (and is) that the US was standing on the sidelines, watching Germany take over Europe and watching Japan take over Asia while doing very little. Jerry B's comment about the isolationists was very correct. There were also some fairly prominent folks who were Nazi sympathizers (if not outright supporter/admirers). Lindbergh was one of the most notable. Joseph P. Kennedy made Lindbergh seem positively indifferent by comparison.

A) The record of the Tribe having engaged in such behavior some 3,000+ years ago (with the excuse of divine instruction) is not a matter of pride. B) The Tanakh is a tribal history, not intended for universal consumption. C) The Koran is the unrepentant ranting of an illiterate, violent pervert who got much of his inspiration from a garbled interpretation of the Tanakh. The parts this vicious deviate held most dear are those which best suited his malevolent inclinations. D) The Hebrew scriptures have historical merit in the same sense as do any surviving writings of that era (though I think the earlier tale of Gilgamesh has more to recommend it). E) The Koran, like the Book of Mormon, was but the dictation of a cunning sociopath whose goals were power and an endless supply of strange pussy. So your book of fables you read and discard the parts you find distasteful. The other book of fables you read and you highlight the parts you find distasteful. Sounds like a prime example of confirmation bias to me. Nice try. I know Rabbis who are historical scholars, and are well aware that in the time frame in which the Tanakh was generated the norm was to include mythological constructs along with otherwise verifiable data. Read some of Mary Renault's work to get some idea of what I mean. The Book of Esther, as an extreme case, takes place in an era that was comparatively well documented elsewhere, but no mention is made by other sources of the events described therein. This calls into question the veracity of the whole account - yet we celebrate Purim for its traditions anyway. One does not have to accept the role played by Olympians to surmise that there is some factual basis for the Iliad or Odyssey. Since they were 'Epic Poems,' the principle of 'poetic license' comes into play. Do I 'believe' anything in one book or another? No, I accept the plausible, subject to credible refutation. Was there a 'Santa Claus?' Sort of - there was a Byzantine big shot named Nicholas who gained a reputation for his generosity and good deeds, and became 'Saint Nicholas.' Is there a 'Santa Claus?' Sort of - there is the Thomas Nast variant that has become a part of popular culture, and has every bit as clear an identity and characteristics as Sherlock Holmes, Superman and Mickey Mouse. The Tanakh is a compilation of characteristic Bronze Age into early Iron Age writings, some details of which are historically verifiable (within limits), and amounts to a heavily stylized history of a very large and very dysfunctional extended family. The Koran and the Book of Mormon are, again, the ramblings of charismatic illiterates that used the Tanakh and Christian Scriptures for a claim to legitimacy, and served to entrench the power base of their respective sources. Due to its recent origins, the Book of Mormon can be refuted line and verse in any and all of its original claims (Joseph Smith was a virtuoso bullshit artist). The Koran does not make as many specific claims subject to analysis, but those that it does are routinely false. Scientology is complete nonsense coming and going. L. Ron Hubbard makes comic book authors look like masters of insight. BSBD, Winsor

.................................................................................. Please explain how that makes those authors better than L. Ron Hubbard Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Forgive me for overlooking elron, since he does make it a trifecta. About the only differences that come to mind are that elron was at least semi-literate, was not known to have a flock of wives, and apparently was willing to wait until they hit puberty. Other than that they are like peas in a pod. For the record, I am lumping together Islam, Mormon and Scientology as isms created from whole cloth by charismatic individuals. Joseph Smith and the Profit Muhammad were illiterate opportunists who used Judaism and Christianity as a loose basis for their diatribes, while L. Ron Hubbard was literate, if maladjusted, and synthesized a variety of bits and pieces into his particular ism, liberally infused with pure nonsense. As a mental well being indicator, any of them work just fine. If you think it's silly, you may be okay; if it even begins to make sense to you, you are certifiably FUBAR. Mein Kampf provides a baseline for malevolence that is greatly eclipsed by the Koran. The Profit Muhammad, far from being a 'Prince of Peace,' was a murderous, rapacious ne'er do well, and the recital of his diatribes reflects that. BSBD, Winsor

A) The record of the Tribe having engaged in such behavior some 3,000+ years ago (with the excuse of divine instruction) is not a matter of pride. B) The Tanakh is a tribal history, not intended for universal consumption. C) The Koran is the unrepentant ranting of an illiterate, violent pervert who got much of his inspiration from a garbled interpretation of the Tanakh. The parts this vicious deviate held most dear are those which best suited his malevolent inclinations. D) The Hebrew scriptures have historical merit in the same sense as do any surviving writings of that era (though I think the earlier tale of Gilgamesh has more to recommend it). E) The Koran, like the Book of Mormon, was but the dictation of a cunning sociopath whose goals were power and an endless supply of strange pussy.

The Tanakh is Bronze Age family lore. Its significance within the Tribe is mainly a combination of 'this is our Mr. Bad Example history' and 'you've come a long way, baby.' It was not put forth for general consumption. I can think of no Parsha that fails to demonstrate our Patriarchs had a lousy batting average. I have read both Tanakh and Koran, and there is no comparison, either in content or intent. BSBD, Winsor

And that was the only point I was making. Theres a difference between Islam and Islamists. (The latter being a perverted interpretation) Bullshit. Read the Koran. It makes Mein Kampf look like an exercise in sweetness and light.

While I loathe college sports in general, there are a few exceptions. At the University of Illinois I was a Calculus, Physics and Chemistry tutor. I was very impressed with some people whose only chance of a college education was by dint of their skill on the tennis court, swimming pool or what have you. By and large they studied their asses off so they could make as much progress as possible before a torn ligament or whatever cut short their underwritten academics. Needless to say, there were zero football players among our clientele. Some schools do not offer athletic 'scholarships' at all, which puts participation into the 'for the love of the game' category. At West Point, Annapolis, the Air Force Academy and the like, the academic requirements are identical for all students. At the Army Navy game, the cadets/midshipmen in the stands and the players on the field must meet the same standards, and nobody gets a sweetheart deal on classes or grades. NCAA football and basketball make me ill. BSBD, Winsor

Like when you try and convince everyone that the earth is only 6000 years old? Dude, the year is 5775. 6,000? Sheesh. Shows how much YOU know. The date and time of the Creation is definitively known to have been nightfall preceding 23 October 4004 BC. I am pretty sure Adam was created knowing what day it was, how to count, what a year was, what was the significance of the date, and exactly how long it took for everything to come about. The idea that it is simply Bronze Age mythology adopted from various cultures at one time or another, as might be suggested by close analysis of cuneiform records, which appear to predate the appearance of similar parts of Hebrew lore, is obviously misinformed. It is my suspicion that all the original records were eaten by a T. Rex over 100 years before the Flood, and that what we have are good faith reconstructions. I am still a little fuzzy as to whether Adam was created on 6 Tishrei or the universe was created in Elul and 1 Tishrei was the birthday of the Very First Person Ever. Very important stuff, that. BSBD, Winsor

Like when you try and convince everyone that the earth is only 6000 years old? Dude, the year is 5775. 6,000? Sheesh.

With which side are purple unicorns aligned? Or are they neutral, like Switzerland? She's pink, not purple! And she's invisible!

The bottom line is that our reserves of fossil fuels are finite. We have gone through the easy to obtain sources, and are going after the more difficult to extract sources. The good news is that there are significant amounts of the difficult to extract sources of petroleum type stuff, and we are getting better at getting to it. The bad news is that there is less of it available than we tend to use. If people living elsewhere have lots and lots of oil of any type, that does not do us much good. At some point they are sure to realize that we are giving them nothing but worthless paper (electronically speaking) in return for their resources. At that point it will be more difficult than trying to be repaid by a junkie. We are so far behind the power curve economically that it does not make a hell of a lot of difference when all is said and done. Nevertheless, it would be nice if we made any significant headway towards long term self sufficiency. It can be done, but the likelihood that we will pull it off is vanishingly small. I wish I was wrong, but I'm not. BSBD, Winsor

Source? You may be looking at total world production, but that does not count for much if you do not live where the oil is. If the US of A is to be self-sufficient, it sure as hell will not be on the basis of any large reserves of petroleum of any kind. The fact that other countries have 'proven oil reserves' does not help us unless they are willing to send it to us indefinitely in return for an endless stream of IOUs. I would not. BSBD, Winsor

I came across this website that shows that our oil usage is down and known reserves are up. Great. My problem is comparing daily use to known reserves. If you multiply the daily use of ~18 million barrels by 365 you get like 6.9 billion barrels a year consumption. Our known reserves are ~30.5 billion barrels according to this analysis. Assuming the decimal point is in the right place, our current rate of consumption - reduced though it may be from its historical peak - is sufficient to burn all the oil we are sure that we have in less than 4 1/2 years. If this is the case, anyone who thinks that carbon emission is our biggest problem can rest assured that it is a self correcting problem. Finding gasoline for your Hummer, OTOH, might be a problem in the not too distant future. Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think. BSBD, Winsor

Maybe the unwilling sperm recipient/unwilling lead recipient analogy?

Damn it, if I get pregnant I'm keeping the baby and that's final!

3.5% of the population ADMIT to being gay. You silly savage.