Slashdot Mirror

Another good recent read was "God Is Not Great" by Christopher Hitchens.

You made the overreaching claims, saying that his life was unmitigated suckage, which no sane person would have chosen. I merely pointed out a few inconvenient truths that undermined your claims. Many people would choose to be king for a day, rather than a peasant for a lifetime.

I don't think you've successfully undermined my point. Many people would choose king for a day over peasant for a lifetime. No sane person would choose king for a day over king for a week or amonth, however. And that's the choice you're asking people to believe Smith made.

I reserve judgment, since the only evidence you seem to offer is your unwavering faith in Smith's extraordinary talents.

This is nonsense. I don't believe Smith was that talented. But the only explanation for producing a work of the magnitude of the Book of Mormon are divine inspiration and talent. So, presuming he had no divine inspiration, he must have had immense talent. Why would someone with that level of talent choose a life of poverty when he could have lived much more comfortably?

You make it sound as though Smith had some sort of crystal ball (or a stone in a hat, perhaps) which allowed him to foresee all the consequences of his actions.

Good grief, man. This isn't pscyhohistory and he's not Hari Seldon. I'm talking about really, really basic stuff. Like "If they tried to kill you for saying you saw an angel and translating gold plates, maybe another work of translation might not increase your safety or prosperity." It doesn't take clairvoyance to see that, it takes basic intelligence.

You might be surprised to know it, but I believe that Smith believed in his own spiritual mission, which was more important to him than any wealth he ever might have accumulated.

So you're in the Fawn Brodie school of history. You might consider reading this: http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=47

Are you claiming that in the "he never had sex with anyone but Emma" sense, or the "he was sealed to every last woman before he had sex with them" sense? If the former, then your argument is with the historical record, not me.

I have no argument with the historical record. The historical record includes zero evidence that Joseph Smith actually consumated any of those marriages, and at least circumstantial evidence that he did not.

Now, how *was* Lucy Harris going to alter those pages?

I don't know a thing about forgery. I believe that minor changes would have been sufficient and that the workmanship need not have been extremely high quality. Having said that, I don't know precisely what methods may have been used to alter ink writings on 19th century parchment.

I'll bite. I have nothing to lose but Slashdot karma.

I know I'll get marked as a troll for this, but that is not my intent, so please try to be open minded. :-)

Likewise, I hope that you will respect my opinion and read this post with an open mind.

When someone can prove to me why one god is any more real than any other god, I'll believe.

You're not the first person to say something to that effect. There is documented history showing that people have been making similar statements for millennia. For example, I would refer you to the story of Elijah vs. the 450 priests of Baal as recorded in 1 Kings 18, except you would probably scoff and say that it's a religious text and not a historical document, although I would contend that it's both.

Until that point in time, I regard religion as a silly obsession for the weak and stupid.

What an unfortunately hasty statement. Do you really believe that the likes of Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, renowned computer scientist Don Knuth, "the father of genetics" Gregor Mendel, Michael Faraday (a major contributor to the scientific field of electromagnetism), Henry Eyring (who is credited for one of the most important developments of 20th-century chemistry), and a host of other brilliant scientists are all "weak and stupid"?

(Incidentally, Eyring is a Mormon, and he has humorously but insightfully posed "Is there any conflict between science and religion? There is no conflict in the mind of God, but often there is conflict in the minds of men.")

Leaking out a behind the scenes handbook thins the wall between Shepard and the flock, and may allow the sheep to think out side their assigned position in life, thus weakening the control the church has over its followers.

As other commenters here have stated, this issue seems to be much more about copyright infringement than suppressing "secret" information.

Free thinking and free access to information corrupts belief in god because, "as you know, reality has a liberal bias." (Colbert.)

Nice. You quoted Stephen Colbert in order to get a karma boost. Congratulations.

Setting aside the irrelevant Colbert quote, I strongly disagree with your claim that "free thinking and free access to information corrupts belief in god." As previously noted, some of the most brilliant scientists in the world would disagree with that assessment. Beyond that, there are whole organizations with very intelligent scholars who dedicate much of their time to in-depth research on religious topics (The Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, formerly known as FARMS, comes immediately to mind, but I'm sure other readers can think of similar organizations).

There is no proof of god and there is no universal truth, any belief system that relies on such a fiction crumbles in the light of critical thinking and knowledge.

As another poster has wisely assessed, "Logically, then... your own statement cannot be universally true."

Is there proof of the existence of a supreme being? Any statistician should be able to tell you that the odds are in favor of the existence of a god.

Consider, if you will, that you're walking along a beach and happen upon a beautiful Swiss watch lying in the sand near the surf. You pick it up an examine it, and it's in perfect working condition. The time is even set correctly, to the

So much to respond to, so little time. Picking a few points at semi-random:

There wouldn't be talk of "universal health care", "single payer health care" in that case.

No one is talking about universal health care, they're talking about universal health insurance (although they all try to blur this distinction as much as possible). Using the power of the state to enrich corporate backers is a hallmark of fascist (far right wing) political systems.

Academia is far left wing.

Are you riffing off of the Colbert quip "The truth has a well know liberal bias" or are you serious that you think anyone engaged in the study or teaching of anything is "far left wing"? Would you, for example, consider the faculty of Brigam Young are all far left wingers?

If the media were right of center, we'd be talking about abolishing the Federal Income Tax, abolishing the Federal Reserve

If you are correct there should be several countries that are farther to the right than the US, and thus have no taxation and no national banking system and don't not attempt to regulate the value of their currency. Please name a few. If you can't then either a) the US is farther to the right than any other country, b) your definition is whacked, or c) both.

This should give you a rough idea of my response to your entire thesis.

--MarkusQ

Some examples: Sonia Johnson, the intellectual purge with included Michael Quinn and other presenters at Sunstone. I could go on, but why? The message has already been sent and received: if you think for yourself, you're already out.

Ok. Quick scan of Wiki articles results in this:

• Sonia Johnson was excommunicated for "a variety of misdeeds including hindering the worldwide missionary program, damaging internal Mormon social programs and teaching false doctrine." So, what, a church can't protect its doctrinal integrity by throwing people out who deliberately teach false doctrine?
• Michael Quinn was excommunicated for, among other things, his openly homosexual orientation, something that is completely and fully against church doctrines. This by itself is grounds for excommunication. Any church members who persist in their homosexuality are excommunicated. The Church views homosexuality as a grave sin. Note that the details for the excommunication of the other 5 in the so-called "September Six" are unavailable, so there is little or no evidence that it was some sort of "intellectual purge" as you claim. The fact that they all happened to be intellectual people does not mean that was the cause. Remember, correlation does not show causation.

So both of the people you give as examples openly defied church leaders by teaching false doctrines. What would you propose the Church leadership do?

I would like to point out that interviews regarding worthiness include the questions "Do you believe that $CURRENT_PROPHET is called of God to receive revelation to guide the church?", "Do you participate in or affiliate with any anti-LDS groups?", "Do you live the law of chastity? [which would include not giving in to any homosexual urges]", and so on. These are the standards by which church membership is measured. If a person answers incorrectly, the bishop's responsibility is to either assist the member in repenting, or to pass the appropriate information on to the stake president (his superior in the church heirarchy) for appropriate disciplinary action.

In many cases people won't help other people because they already paid their tithing. They'll leave it to others to dole out who gets the cash.

Those people would be wrong in doing so. You should not judge the actions of some members to be the belief or doctrine of the Church.

But I bet if you look at the nitty-gritty details of LDS offerings and its cashflow, you'll see most of going to new "timber and concrete" projects: the forest of new ward meeting houses, maintenence, all kinds of new facilities, add their baseline university (BYU, etc) expenses, with what's left siphoned off to projects like Triad and City Creek Center. In terms of percentage, there won't be a lot left for those less fortunate.

Ah, but here you have simply demonstrated your lack of understanding of how Church finances work. There are several sources of funding from member contributions:

• Tithing - used to construct and maintain buildings and temples, as noted above, and to assist in the operation of church-owned schools such as BYU. Some money goes toward the operation of the missionary program, and to fund scholarships for students who qualify.
• Fast Offerings - used to fund welfare programs, to purchase supplies for relief efforts during and after natural disasters, and so on. In addition to paying tithing, all members are encouraged to pay fast offerings each month in an unspecified amount. In this way, members can best care for the needy by contributing to the programs the church has set up for such efforts. The Church operates dozens of employment offices which are open to all, member or no.
• Con

We've worked with several universities over the years on the BZFlag project, an on-line multiplayer networked tank combat game, where the game is often used to teach artificial intelligence computer science course concepts. We've also had several graduate students use BZFlag in their research as the primary subject material, leading to actual peer-reviewed scientific journal publications (ACM and others) as well as masters and PhD thesis papers. The game of course already provides the simulation framework itself, 2D and 3D environments, a graphical client that allows for interactive or unattended control, logging facilities, an established communications protocol, an extensive active user community (i.e. guinea pig "testers"), and various means of observing and interacting with others.

We were rather suspicious when a bunch of students all started showing up in our IRC channel a few years ago asking (in Spanish) for help compiling the game all of the sudden. We get players from all over the world asking for help in all sorts of languages and are pretty accustomed to it, but there was clearly something going on at the rate kids were showing up. Fortunately, several of our core members are fluent in Spanish and we quickly found out that they came from a particular university down in South America where the instructor had given them an assignment that used BZFlag as their simulation framework. Over the years, we had others from other universities approach our devs with similar intentions -- sometimes initiated by the professors, sometimes successfully initiated or sales-pitched by their teaching assistants.

One of the most successful academic uses, which has been running and improving for several years now, has been the BZRC - BZFlag Remote Control project at Brigham Young University where the TAs set up an entire framework that simplified the means by which the students controlled their tanks. Their framework was instantly more flexible and better than what we already had in BZFlag to the extent that their project was eventually rolled back into the game. For the students, it's a win because they're given a solid framework that they could immediately set up to work on their specific academic tasks; for us, it's been a win because of the code that has been rolled back into the game and the sheer pride of having our work used in an acadmic context.

The academic angle has been so compelling that it was actually a major factor in BZFlag being accepted into the 2007 Google Summer of Code. We were able to demonstrate BZFlag's impact potential and usefulness as a programmable simulation framework for teaching various CS concepts (AI, networking, user interface design, etc), which in-turn gave us the opportunity to have a rather gifted student work on improving our programmable bot interface throughout the summer. The student successfully converted the 2D Java-based Robocode API to our 3D C++-based simulation environment adding in hooks for other programming languages in the process. We're next looking to host a series of open AI programming tank competitions where people create BZFlag bots that will compete against others , with GSoC-funded cash prizes. Exciting stuff!

Ah... The Hague Convention, Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land
What you cite comes from Chapter 1, Article 1 of that document

Now how do you explain why those who were rounded up in the opening days of the occupation of Afganistan do not qualify?

Art. 2. The inhabitants of a territory which has not been occupied, who, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having had time to organize
      themselves in accordance with Article 1, shall be regarded as belligerents if they carry arms openly and if they respect the laws and customs of war.

public healthcare in the US is actually *more* efficient than private healthcare.

US private healthcare is over-regulated. Every state has different regulations (imagine if your computer had to have 512MB of RAM in Maryland and 256MB of RAM in New York). There are too many state requirements for what health insurance covers to provide affordable coverage for most people. These regulations can add as much as $2000 to health care premiums.

And there is the WWII era Federal Tax laws that make employer-provided health care tax deductible, while non-employer-provided health care is not. This leads to onlyh 3.6% of Americans having non-employer provided health insurance.

Of course there is no real definition of "health care efficiency." There has been some examination of administrative costs of Medicare versus private insurance, for example. Medicare describes administrative costs as a ratio of processing costs divided by claims.

The claim is that "Medicare administrative costs are about 2 percent of claims costs, while private insurance companies' administrative costs are in the 20 to 25 percent range." The problem is that the average medical cost for a Medicare beneficiary per year is $6,600, while the average medical cost for someone with employer-sponsored health insurance was $2,700. Thus the "administrative cost ratio" is comparing apples to oranges. It also is unclear if the full cost of Medicare fraud investigations and prosecutions is worked into the ratio (private insurance is usually more pro-active in avoiding fraud, which may raise administrative costs, but probably saves overall costs by not paying out fraudulent claims.)

Anyway, I suggest that before we create a fully-socialist healthcare system (as opposed to one that is just ~50% socialized in temrs of health care dollars from Medicare and Medicaid) that we actually de-regulate private healthcare on a nationwide basis.

Its run by "LDS Entrepeneurs".. same dif.

They tried to baptize my grandmother after she died, and they took over my G-mother in laws funeral after she converted very late in her life. It's not about the religion, its about the people and how they treat people.

Mark it troll-ish all you want, its my opinion and my karma can take it.

http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/63677

I'd much rather stick with my landline, thank you very much. My calls never drop and they don't sound like I'm talking through a tin can. You can actually understand me the whole time in contrast with a crackly cell phone.

I wish cell phone companies would use the advances in wireless technology (e.g. http://www.et.byu.edu/news_jensen.htm) to improve the quality of the connection rather than squeeze more subscribers into each cell tower, but I doubt that will happen any time soon.

It's because they're adorable. Nobody ever cries when a star-nosed mole gets shoveled, or a possum gets run over.

You my friend are a brain washed liar.

No, you are an ignorant fool. You use words like "Utard", "crazy", "cult", "gestapo", "lying", and "brain washed" to perjorative effect when you DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Did you step foot on BYU campus? Did you speak to a current BYU student? Did you go to Temple Square? If you didn't, then don't correct someone who knows what they are talking about!

BYU blocks Youtube because of bandwidth.

http://theboard.byu.edu/index.php?area=viewall&id= 32625

Tuition at BYU is highly subsidized by LDS Church funds. Those funds donated sometimes by very poor people should not be wasted on something as unrelated to education as Youtube, porn, and file sharing. If this "offends" you, too bad. BYU students don't have to live on-campus, and can access Youtube all they want if they pay for it out of their own dime.

Same thing goes for MTV. It is not shown on campus. You didn't read the article that you posted. It is 22 years old! The article clearly states that this was a limited action taken by a few over-zealous local leaders. BYU policy (from your article) states 'Paul Richards, director of public relations at BYU, issued this statement; "BYU was not involved in the decision of some local apartment owners and managers to pull MTV from their complexes."'

I was a student at BYU, and I watched MTV at a couple of different off-campus apartments, about 10 years ago.

You're wrong about MTV being "banned" in Provo

You my friend are a brain washed liar. Here's an article from your very own school.
http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/57672

It's well know that the Mormon church influences public policy in Utah and this is one such issue.

Stop lying to defend the Lord!

OK, I'll bite to this flame... Henry Morgenthau was then US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Morgenthau%2C_ Sr.), this is what HE wrote, of the stuff HE saw http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/morgentha u/Morgen24.htm ... and this is but an example, you can read the rest of his book : http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/morgentha u/MorgenTC.htm and even then, you can look at all the sources that are from non-Armenians (http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/Genocide/armenia n_genocide.htm, the pictures might upset your stomach... http://imia.cc.duth.gr/turkey/arme.e.html, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm, etc.).

I will go on and say that nationalism, radicalism serves no purpose for humanity, it is racism in it's purist form and it only serves to treat another person with less respect than you would like to be treated yourself. For shame, I get sick when I think of all the people that died and still die for such petty things.

OK, I'll bite to this flame... Henry Morgenthau was then US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Morgenthau%2C_ Sr.), this is what HE wrote, of the stuff HE saw http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/morgentha u/Morgen24.htm ... and this is but an example, you can read the rest of his book : http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/comment/morgentha u/MorgenTC.htm and even then, you can look at all the sources that are from non-Armenians (http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/Genocide/armenia n_genocide.htm, the pictures might upset your stomach... http://imia.cc.duth.gr/turkey/arme.e.html, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6045182.stm, etc.).

I will go on and say that nationalism, radicalism serves no purpose for humanity, it is racism in it's purist form and it only serves to treat another person with less respect than you would like to be treated yourself. For shame, I get sick when I think of all the people that died and still die for such petty things.

God, I wish I had mod points!

What is actually *hard* to understand is that in the United States, we have difficulty actually understanding what "poor" really can be. It's so easy to make a good life living off the discarded scraps of others because the wealth here is just so pervasive.

The hardest part about understanding the poor is understanding just how far down there is to go. It's why international aid has been so consistently blown and so universally ineffective.

But recently, I've gotten involved with the Grameen Foundation funding micro-credit loans. These are small, (frequently $50 or less, sometimes just $5 is all it takes) loans used to finance small businesses in areas of poverty. It's simply incredible how much difference such a piddling amount of wealth can make in their lives.

People in these dire situations buy a hammer, a shovel, a bag of reeds, and turn around with their economic weapon and make life better.

And it's simply shocking to me that something like a hammer, a shovel, or a bag of reeds would be both so useful to the person, and at the same time so difficult to get that they have to go thru the loan process to get it!

No, I don't profit from the Grameen Foundation. But it's the charity I'm donating to, because it's the charity that just might make its goal of ending global poverty.

I can't seem to find the video on youtube (was it taken down?) but you can buy a good intro here

An Alternative site for getting your answers is The 100 Hour Board.

Ask a question, get your answer in 100 hours. It's run completely by students who try to provide both accurate and witty responses. One of their mottoes is "Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer".

You got it wrong, since his web page is .edu mailto:sbrown@byu.edu

I list my email address using an ASCII art "big" figlet font. Stupid lamness filter won't let me show it here, but check on my website. Here is one site where you can make your own.

Especially if two planes hit by lightning dropped both towers and resulted in molten steel in the pile of rubble. Seeing as how its impossible for jet fuel to melt steel (jet fuel burns from 800F to 1500F depending on conditions) and that steel melts at 2750F. I would certainly hope it would be famous for violating the laws of physics.

The primary purpose of copyright law is not so much to protect the interests of the authors/creators, but rather to promote the progress of science and the useful arts--that is--knowledge.
http://www.lib.byu.edu/departs/copyright/tutorial/ module1/page3.htm
Disney benefitted greatly from the unprotected works of the Brothers Grimm. Walt Disney himself is long dead. The constitional protection of the public good from monopolistic control should be honored. (No, this is not some communist idea, this is what the constitution intended).

Part of the scenario is that there are strong currents around the island which make sailing impractical (this is why they were shipwrecked there in the first place). I should have stated that in the first place, as otherwise a ship would obviously be preferable...

The university is Brigham Young University.

No that is about 60 miles south from here

This Might be useful sometime in your life =o).

Here's my alternative checklist:
1. Bittorrent client
2. Video player

(3. profit?)

Seriously though, I wonder when the media industry will figure out that they can fight piracy by making paying for something easier, faster and more convenient then obtaining a pirated copy. Or atleast close to as easy, fast and convenient..

Now back to figuring out what to call my 47:th Ancient Domains Of Mystery character...

--
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.ht ml

explaining what the fuss is about israel

english MP mr Galloway blows ignorant "reporter" OUT OF THE FRICKEN WATER! hehe makes me laugh every time.

interview with iranian prime minister.[sarcasm] WOw he sounds really crazy...[/sarcasm]

two more links you should really read, though I doubt many will.

well thats all I can do. I cant FORCE you to watch them, and I doubt many will, but if even a couple do, and realise something interesting about the world as they knew it, I'll be happy

here I'll link it again. Make sure to read the pdf linked near the top, as it is in this that the Prof. goes through the chemical analysis evidence for thermite use and information on current nano-thermite tech and also a link to a patent for a device for using thermite to cut vertical beams, not just horizontal ones (patented early 2001 interestingly)

paper showing why we know the towers where explosively demolished

pdf linked showing latest results, including strong evidence of thermite usge in the analysis of the molten metal from the ruins

I used to the the webmaster for the BYU Chemistry Department. I just had a few thoughts. First, you really should read the official press release from BYU about this if you want more information or if you want high resolution photos. One of the things that makes this particular story more interesting than others I've dealt with is that the primary researcher is an undergraduate student. I'm told that it is fairly uncommon for undergraduates to be involved so deeply with this type of research. Oh, and by the way, the BYU Chemistry Department is a big supporter of open source software.

I used to the the webmaster for the BYU Chemistry Department. I just had a few thoughts. First, you really should read the official press release from BYU about this if you want more information or if you want high resolution photos. One of the things that makes this particular story more interesting than others I've dealt with is that the primary researcher is an undergraduate student. I'm told that it is fairly uncommon for undergraduates to be involved so deeply with this type of research. Oh, and by the way, the BYU Chemistry Department is a big supporter of open source software.

Interesting that neither the summary nor the article links to the page at BYU's NewsNet page. It has a few more details, links to other sources, a video, and pictures related to the research.

The thermate proposition is Professor Jones' theory.

Assuming the attack was staged, do you have any evidence that wtc7 would have over seen it?

Assuming the attack was staged, the stagers would've had to have triggered the detonators from /somewhere/. WTC7 floor 23 is as good a candidate as any.

Why couldn't this evidence that you seem to think existed just be loaded into trucks and burned somewhere?

I assume here you're refering to evidence relating to the supposed controlled demolition of WTC 1&2, and not the previously referenced SEC investigations. Electronics (and whatever else is used for controlled demolition) don't burn to well, much better to rig your equipment with explosives and bury them in a pile of steel and powdered concrete.

If you were going to stage an attack like this would you leave any evidence in any form lying around on the day of the attack?

Did you mean "leave any evidence ... lying around BEFORE the attack"? They'd have to keep it somewhere. If you meant AFTER the attack, of course not. And they didn't.

As for Silverstein getting an insurance payout, I'm getting confused. Who do you think staged this attack, Silverstein, Investment Banks or the Government, or perhaps a combination of the three?

One of our previous presidents warned of a "military-industrial complex". I wouldn't say that "the government did 9/11", but that "individuals who've hijacked the ship of state for their own purposes did 9/11" and, having control of the government, twisted the processes thereof to cover their tracks.

Because much of the physical evidence was willfully destroyed, supposition and logical conjecture will have to suffice. See also Scholars for 9/11 Truth: "We check the official 9/11 story against the facts. Learn about our startling discoveries; share them with friends and demand a reinvestigation."

-sulphur is used in a millitary version of thermite called thermate. Im trying to find an independant explanation from why,though it seems it is to lower the melting point of the steel being cut, ie forming a eutectic, making it cut better

- potassium permangenate is used as an oxidising agent in some thermate/ite as well (perhaps mixed with something else to help ignite it?), hence K and Mn

- flourine may be present in the from of polytetraflouroethylene (teflon?) as a base for another oxidising agent according to this report http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/1344-QDsu 9M/webviewable/1344.pdf p120. According to it (a report on techniques for decommisioning nuclear reactors, which investigated thermite with additives):

"These characteristics show that the composition of the mixtures using polytetraflouroethylene as a base has a heat output 2.5 to 5.0 times higher than that of a mixture based on thermite."

- 1,3-diphenyl propane was recorded in "abundance" by the EPA not prof jones. They suggested the possible source as burning polyvynyl choloride compounds, although they admitted they had never before picked it up in ambient sampling such as this(which would suggest that there was at least SOMETHING decidedly strange about the fires in the towers, given the ubiquitous nature of PVC in modern buildings. )

As to the claims of partially evaporated steel, it is not him claiming this it is one Dr. Barnett in the NEW YORK TIMES! he was part of the initial (official) fema investigation, which reported on this anomoly, and recomended investigation into how it could occur, yet none was ever done (officially at least, I guess Prof jones took it up unofficially instead)

it is good to see someone who's objections are based on (what would be to you) logical reasoning (and, it seems, decent scientific knowledge), even if you dont have (m)any of the facts available, rather than the plain denial I see in most people. Should you wish to discuss it further with me, I'd be happy to talk to you on (oh no, eeeevill) msn messenger: hmmmmm_really At hotmail. Ive been looking into it for a while so I can steer you past the disinfo and crazy people and to the meat of the problem (and trust me, its as meaty as a triple bacon meat lovers pizza hold the cheese, base and sauce)

(oh buy the way, I know you havent read his paper on the collapses, or at least his subsequent presentation in which he shows the results of the analysis showing these elements, since you would have read his explanations for why they are there. It would seem a bit... perhaps hypocritical... to pick on the agenda of someone else, while "debunking" their work without actually reading it, wouldnt you say? (nor even reading the initial FEMA investigation it is partly based on it seems))

for anyone interested, all this is outlined in the pdf I linked earlier, But I'll link it again:

pdf showing thermate residue

recommended pre-reading (this is the paper that the pdf is a follow up on)

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.ht ml http://www.rense.com/general66/ressp.htm look up "terrorstorm" on google video (perhaps you should watch "painful deceptions" and "martial law 911" first

have a look here, and also read the pdf linked near the top, you'll see the proof of what I am talking about

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.ht ml

The twin towers where brought down with Thermite. For real, read it.
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.ht ml

Think of it like this: if you just shake up and open a bottle of coke, itll spray everywhere. If you let it sit long enough for the co2 to dissolve, and open it slowly, there is no sudden shock to release the dissolved gas. Same thing with heating water in the microwave in a perfectly smooth container: you can get it hotter than 100 degrees without boiling, because there is no particular spot for the bubbles (of steam) to form.

Well people/populations are like that. First they take your guns (seems logical enough, especially on a plane, even Im not gonna argue with that) then they take your pocket knives (ok..) then they take your nail clippers and plastic cutlery.. (wha?) then they take your toothpaste (huh? what the fuck?). at every stage the pre-flight search and the screening process gets more invasive, the ID you need (papers please) get more invasive, the database kept of your personal info gets bigger, but no one step is enough to "fizz" the population into a full scale revolt (see armed guards doing body searches at footy games, people arrested and locked up for days for peacefull protests, torture sanctioned by the president, unauthorised wiretapping sanctioned by the president. etc etc

Ask yourself this. If 10 years ago, all in one day, the government was to say: no pocket knives, plastic cutlery, nail clippers, metal thingies, pointy thingies, laptops, phones (assuming you had these two items) gameboys, walkmans, toothpaste, breast milk, bottles of water, mouthwash, god knows what, on planes. Body searches at sports games, they where going to torture people openly and no-one could do a thing about it. They would wiretap whoever they want and no one could do a thing about it, they where going to invade whoever they want and no one could do a thing about it, they would arrest anyone they want as a "terrorist" and hold them without charges indeffinately (while probably torturing them for info or fun) and no one could do a thing about it etc etc WOULDNT YOU BE PISSED OFF????WOuld you rise up and protect yourself, family, friends and children from a police state/fascism?

fucken sheeple. Wake up, or it'll be too late. Anyone alarmed by the above post (ie not a sheeple) start by watching "painful deceptions" on google video, then "the money masters" "truth and lies of 9/11", "martial law 9/11" "terrorstorm" etc etc, or, if you want a more scientific/research based intro, go to here , here , here and here (by the way, why this fake terror and restrictions on flying? SO THAT ONLY THE POWERFULL CAN EASILY FLY of course. Those with private jets and helicopters, limo's waiting and entire wardrobes waiting, wont be worried about this crap. Your average family that has to put up with smelly grumpy kids with no toys to keep them occupied for a 10 hour flight, and the distinct likely hood of being stranded in their destination with NO luggage or possessions beyond what they have on their person will be...)

Is this the same BYU where Prof Steven Jones has written a white paper about 911?

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.ht ml

"ABSTRACT
In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government."

http://cs.byu.edu/feature/?section=display&id=168

There is a press release right here from BYU that has links to various videos and other media. Can't seem to find any papers or articles about the process, though I noticed it's being patented so there may not be a lot available (?)

From the specs:

Safety Devices

- Four independent engines for redundancy
- Engine out lights
- Emergency landing under full control is possible on two engines.
- Ballistic parachute provided as an option, mounted above the mast.

That made me laugh hysterically.

Article 5 (Freedom of expression).
(1) Everyone has the right freely to express and to disseminate his opinion by speech, writing and pictures and freely to inform himself from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by radio and motion pictures are guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.
(2) These rights are limited by the provisions of the general laws, the provisions of law for the protection of youth and by the right to inviolability of personal honor.
(3) Art and science, research and teaching are free. Freedom of teaching does not absolve from loyalty to the constitution.

4. Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.

11. The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.

Article 13 [Expression, Censorship]
(1) Everyone has the right, within the limits of the law, to freely express his opinion by word of mouth and in writing, print, or pictorial representation.
(2) The Press may be neither subjected to censorship nor restricted by the licensing system. Administrative postal distribution vetoes do not apply to inland publication.

Article 14 [Freedom of Belief]
(1) Everyone is guaranteed complete freedom of conscience and creed.
(2) The enjoyment of civic and political rights is independent of religious belief. Nevertheless duties incumbent on nationals may not be prejudiced by religious beliefs.
(3) No one can be forced to observe a ritual act or to participate in an ecclesiastical ceremony in so far as he is not subordinate to another who is by law invested with such authority.

This sort of thing [highly parallelizable, highly fault-tolerant computing] was done more than a decade ago, at Hewlett-Packard, in the old Teramac group.

Background here, here, here, etc.

I'm interested where this inherent right to compensation comes from, and where it stops.

And where does your inherent right to copy my creative works come from? These kinds of questions are very interesting to me; I've also thought about it in relation to other "inherent" rights. I think that same question can lead to some interesting lines of thought about other rights we generally feel are inherent: life, liberty, property, etc. I believe in God, so I think these fundamental rights come from above ("endowed by their creator. . ."). If you remove all laws and customs, though, I really don't know the answer to which rights are inherent and independent of anything else. I think that life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness should be inherent rights, but I think that we accept them as inherent as a consequence of the society in which we live (based on Judeo-Christian morals here in the US, like it or lump it).

Another poster pointed out to me that, indeed, nobody has the right to compensation for their creative work. However, I maintain that creative types (including scientists, programers, etc.) have the right to seek compensation for their work. Copyright was established to encourage content creators to publish their works (copyright 101), because without the possibility of compensation, most content creators would keep their work secret or pursue other careers that are of little benefit to our cultural heritage.

Seeking compensation for your work is (or should be) a fundamental right because without this, people will not work. This holds true for trench diggers as well as creative types. One of the purposes of government is to protect the right to seek (not necessarily to obtain) compensation for whatever work you choose to pursue. I disagree with a lot of the finer points of Ayn Rand's writings, but she was on to something with her thoughts on human motivation: i.e., people do what they do because they receive compensation for their work (with money, pride, warm fuzzies, whatever).

I hope I haven't muddled things too badly.

Why do you single out one group of tradesmen for special treatment, this hardly seems reasonable to me. I can create lots of jobs which would not exist without a law to keep them there, and make up inherent rights of compensation. However these jobs would be economically ridiculous.

You have a good point here. what you're implying is that we have laws now that are economically ridiculous. You're right. Copyright for the life of author + 70 years is way too long.

So what you are proposing has never happened before?

Even in situations with FAR worse conditions such as entire large portions of buildings FULLY ENGULFED in flames for many HOURS, even days?

Even though the towers where SPECIFICALLY designed to withstand the damage of aircraft of almost identical size to the ones that crashed?

Even though they were designed to be able to stand with MORE THAN AN ENTIRE SIDE (ie 25% of the total) of the outer columns severed?

and your proof/evidence to support this wild and unreasonable conjecture is what exactly?

duh...I dunno, the hot fire, its burny, steel doesnt like the burny burny..goes boom all fall down.

(oh and you forget, WTC7 had no plane hit it. Claims that it had large diesel tanks on fire within it are just that, claims, and there are MANY VARYING reports on the severity of the damage and fires within WTC7, from different firefighters. You know, changing/inconsistant stories, the sort of thing that normally would make a witness statement doubtfull.)

P.S., this is not about Bush. Bush is a patsy. He almost certainly knew something was coming, but I personally doubt he planned it (plausable deniability and all that). Watch these very interesting videos and read these reports properly, preferably in this order, then do your own research on the issues involved, and see whether you still think there is no hidden agenda/conspiracy in play, and that you havent been lied to.(you can call it a (anti)propaganda course if you like, I dont care, just watch it)

1.) "The Money Masters" part 1 part2on google video (not even 9/11 related, but EVERYONE should watch this, and make their own minds up whether they believe it.)

2.) "truth and lies of 9/11" on google video (by an ex narcotics policeman with a long family history of inteligence/enforcement etc)

3.) WACO rules of engagement part1 part2, just to show you this sort of thing (media lies, government coverups) is not just bush related

4.) JFK II the bush connection you can disbelieve the bush connection if you want, the point to get from this film is the amount of lying to the public and complete disinformation that comes through the media

5.) getting into 9/11 now: read these reports: "why indeed did the WTC buildings collapse" (by a physics proffessor at BYU, make sure you watch the WTC7 collapse footage as well, its only short.

6.) ...WTC...Why the Official Account Cannot Be True for all of you who think you are being "scientific" or using common sense in doubting the conspiracy theories.

lastly, do your own research, use your own brain. www.scholarsfor911truth.org is a nice starting place. lookup WTC Gold repository, alex jones predicts 911 (you tube), the lone gunman pilot episode (you tube), afghanistan oil pipeline, opium production in afghanistan, bin laden fake tapes (his nose is WRONG, among other things, its not him), put options, securacom, WTC power downs, "everybodies gotta learn sometime" (google video), cheney "does the order still stand", bush goat story, PNAC "pearl harbour", pearl harbour itself, skull and bones bohemian grove(its not imaginary, its real, what they do, you m

How do you know? You can't pick one off the street any more than you can a Catholic. Mormons really do dress normally. Go to http://www.byu.edu/ and scroll through the 4 or so pictures on the top of the front page. Most of the students there are Mormons. Again, Mormon missionaries--who dress like you are saying--are a small subset of Mormons.