Indeed, one could probably find adherents to the notion that it's a far better way of starting off a nation than with a pack of bible thumpers with persecution complexes...
mmmm possibly, but I don't use my 'ears, hair, and uh... other appendages' for locomotion, either, as the fish does its fins. And fishes' motile fins are connected skeletally by structures more or less homlogous to our own anatomy. So I'd still count them.
I'm at a loss to think of any two-limbed complex organisms. Purely in terms of locomotion on land, though, bipedal is reputedly more energy efficient than quadripedal movement.
Hmm, unless you have a different definition of the Dodds Corollary to mine (I'm looking at Wikipedia), you made the Nazi reference, so you're self-nullifying. Mind you, invoking Godwin's Law is in itself pretty meaningless. I guess I really should have called the corollary straight up.
Simple, then. Stop subsidizing, and slap a tax on HFCS - and cigarettes, alcohol, things that are known to contribute to poor health - and use that to help pay for the nationalised health care. That way the corporations contibuting to poor health will be paying, not those suffering (medically or fiscally.)
Why would you doubt the GP? Average walking pace for adults is around 3-3.5mph. So the commute, walking, would take comfortably less than 2 hours each way. I'm compelled to think of you as too unimaginative to be able to conceive of anyone choosing to walk that distance, and too fat and lazy to try it for yourself. If you think two hours is too long a commute, try getting up earlier. I ride my bike almost 25 km round trip to work every day, it takes an hour (it's also much quicker than any other form of transport I could use), but I work with a guy who rides an hour and a half each way.
Time to get off your arse and ease your oil addiction, lardboy.
I've learned to pick the best apples - a solid tap with the flat of your finger should give you a high pitched sound, the floury, nastier apples will sound lower. Peaches, mangoes, melons - you should always smell them, though the percussive technique is usually a good melon indicator too. You're looking for more resonant, though, from a melon, rather than higher pitched.
Monsanto has an alternative? Monsanto probably developed the new strain of the disease in their labs. I mean, why muck about trying to sell an 'improved' product when you can have the only product, by killing the alternatives? They're just not quite brave enough to try to make all wheat or soy but their patented varieties extinct yet. Better to experiment with plants that only Third World countries call staples.
Call me cynical, but I've seen how these fuckers work.
Well that's clearly the problem - not religion per se, but religion in the service of the state.
Religion is not necessarily about slaughter or at least domination in the name of your god or gods, but statehood is without doubt the business of domination.
Legend has it that early Christians flatly refused to partake in violence. That was the nature of their religion. Once pressed into official service the character of the religion changed to the violent beast we see today.
I suspect similar results would be acsertained for any other religion used as a tool of state.
Can you provide real-world examples along with details about how these senior management got their jobs, and who exactly was paying them these ridiculous amounts to make bad decisions? I heard of a case where a certain individual was voted (repeatedly) into a very senior government position despite having a history of failed businesses and alcohol abuse, as well as suspicions of drug abuse, dereliction of duty and insider trading. Apparently he was able to get access to this position of governmental seniority largely through family connections. It seems as if he'll walk away from his current position with massive rewards, despite incurring massive national debt, devaluing the national currency, starting unwinnable wars, and generally being an international laughing-stock.
If he could achieve all this without fear of being held in the least acccountable, after his failures in business, I'd say there are significant parallels between business and government. Especially in a system where business effectively runs government.
The funny thing is that law schools can't even agree what constitutes 'property', except for a few basic rules, ie. exclusivity (the ability to keep other people off what's yours), alienability (the ability to separate what is yours from you, eg. sale), and probably one or two other things I can't remember anymore. Even then it's difficult. Add all the various subsets of property: chattels, real, intellectual, conceptual, fictional (I jest), whatever - the problems are functionally insurmountable, and serve no-one well but the lawyers.
Hmm, and you're posting this AC? Jolly good. I'm glad for you that you feel you can speak for all non-Western cultures here in this very Western arena of discourse, as well as all people (consumers) whatever that means in this context.
Seriously, you 'outta' learn to spell and control some basic tenets of syntax, and not make frankly silly ad hominem attacks, and develop a little understanding of something beyond the 'halfway-scientific', oh and not 'spew out term' that you clearly don't understand on anything more than a very basic level, and then I might take the trouble to reply to you again.
Western philosophy, religion and therefore culture in general have traditionally maintained as one of their most central tenets the dichotomy of nature versus culture - that is, the "human" world versus the "natural" world, with the implicit concept of 'man' as the inheritor and master of 'nature'.
Artifacts produced by 'man' are therefore products of culture, not nature, and while it may be in the nature of 'man' to create said artifacts, it does not imply a crossing of the nature/culture divide, as humans remain, by definition, on their side of the picture, and nature, ever productive and sumbissive to man's will, on its.
So to answer your second question, according to conventional cultural wisdom: no, humans are not "part fo the nature". Because we are human. To suggest otherwise is to overturn millennia of how people have formulated their thoughts and their culture, which is not necessarily a bad or wrong thing to do, just a lot harder than you might think.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, one could probably find adherents to the notion that it's a far better way of starting off a nation than with a pack of bible thumpers with persecution complexes...
That was my last experience of arriving at Heathrow, direct from Bangkok, two and a half years ago.
There was immigration control, with the expected passport check, but Customs? Nothing. No one.
You've never been to London, have you.
We hear almost exactly that at railway stations...
Annoying as hell.
From a loudspeaker next to the camera: "Fear not citizen, you are being filmed for your own protection. Be Well."
That would sure make me feel better.
That makes pimping the oldest profession, doesn't it?
mmmm possibly, but I don't use my 'ears, hair, and uh... other appendages' for locomotion, either, as the fish does its fins.
And fishes' motile fins are connected skeletally by structures more or less homlogous to our own anatomy.
So I'd still count them.
No, fish tend to have a couple of sets of bilaterally symmetrical fins, the pectoral and the ventral or pelvic.
The basic mammalian model, I always thought, was a 6-element system - most mammals have a tail, even some humans are born with one, albeit vestigial.
I'm at a loss to think of any two-limbed complex organisms.
Purely in terms of locomotion on land, though, bipedal is reputedly more energy efficient than quadripedal movement.
Definitely Replayable Music
Hmm, unless you have a different definition of the Dodds Corollary to mine (I'm looking at Wikipedia), you made the Nazi reference, so you're self-nullifying.
Mind you, invoking Godwin's Law is in itself pretty meaningless. I guess I really should have called the corollary straight up.
Sounds like time to invoke Godwin's Law.
Couldn't help yourself, could you?
Simple, then.
Stop subsidizing, and slap a tax on HFCS - and cigarettes, alcohol, things that are known to contribute to poor health - and use that to help pay for the nationalised health care. That way the corporations contibuting to poor health will be paying, not those suffering (medically or fiscally.)
Why would you doubt the GP?
Average walking pace for adults is around 3-3.5mph. So the commute, walking, would take comfortably less than 2 hours each way.
I'm compelled to think of you as too unimaginative to be able to conceive of anyone choosing to walk that distance, and too fat and lazy to try it for yourself. If you think two hours is too long a commute, try getting up earlier.
I ride my bike almost 25 km round trip to work every day, it takes an hour (it's also much quicker than any other form of transport I could use), but I work with a guy who rides an hour and a half each way.
Time to get off your arse and ease your oil addiction, lardboy.
I've learned to pick the best apples - a solid tap with the flat of your finger should give you a high pitched sound, the floury, nastier apples will sound lower.
Peaches, mangoes, melons - you should always smell them, though the percussive technique is usually a good melon indicator too. You're looking for more resonant, though, from a melon, rather than higher pitched.
Monsanto has an alternative?
Monsanto probably developed the new strain of the disease in their labs.
I mean, why muck about trying to sell an 'improved' product when you can have the only product, by killing the alternatives?
They're just not quite brave enough to try to make all wheat or soy but their patented varieties extinct yet. Better to experiment with plants that only Third World countries call staples.
Call me cynical, but I've seen how these fuckers work.
Well that's clearly the problem - not religion per se, but religion in the service of the state.
Religion is not necessarily about slaughter or at least domination in the name of your god or gods, but statehood is without doubt the business of domination.
Legend has it that early Christians flatly refused to partake in violence. That was the nature of their religion. Once pressed into official service the character of the religion changed to the violent beast we see today.
I suspect similar results would be acsertained for any other religion used as a tool of state.
hee hee,
now you're getting it!
That was funny!
Touchy, aren't we?
"America is the first country to have gone from barbarism to decadence without the usual intervening period of civilization."
Oscar Wilde said that. It's funny. Deal with it.
Seems some Americans inherited the German gene for humour. And for invasion.
It seems as if he'll walk away from his current position with massive rewards, despite incurring massive national debt, devaluing the national currency, starting unwinnable wars, and generally being an international laughing-stock.
If he could achieve all this without fear of being held in the least acccountable, after his failures in business, I'd say there are significant parallels between business and government. Especially in a system where business effectively runs government.
100 Fahrenheit is nicely warm, not 'hot.' Welcome to subjectivity.
100 Celsius is the boiling point of water. Meet objectivity, and coffee.
0 Fahrenheit is trouble for brass monkeys, me? I'm toasty 'cause I take precautions. Subjectivity.
0 Celsius keeps ice in my whiskey. Objectivity.
The modern world beckons, America.
The funny thing is that law schools can't even agree what constitutes 'property', except for a few basic rules, ie. exclusivity (the ability to keep other people off what's yours), alienability (the ability to separate what is yours from you, eg. sale), and probably one or two other things I can't remember anymore. Even then it's difficult. Add all the various subsets of property: chattels, real, intellectual, conceptual, fictional (I jest), whatever - the problems are functionally insurmountable, and serve no-one well but the lawyers.
Mac-user-levitation technology is only a small conceptual step away, once you acknowledge Steve Jobs' ability to walk on water.
Hmm, and you're posting this AC? Jolly good. I'm glad for you that you feel you can speak for all non-Western cultures here in this very Western arena of discourse, as well as all people (consumers) whatever that means in this context.
Seriously, you 'outta' learn to spell and control some basic tenets of syntax, and not make frankly silly ad hominem attacks, and develop a little understanding of something beyond the 'halfway-scientific', oh and not 'spew out term' that you clearly don't understand on anything more than a very basic level, and then I might take the trouble to reply to you again.
Until then, have fun being 'part fo the nature'.
This is an extremely disingenuous argument.
Western philosophy, religion and therefore culture in general have traditionally maintained as one of their most central tenets the dichotomy of nature versus culture - that is, the "human" world versus the "natural" world, with the implicit concept of 'man' as the inheritor and master of 'nature'.
Artifacts produced by 'man' are therefore products of culture, not nature, and while it may be in the nature of 'man' to create said artifacts, it does not imply a crossing of the nature/culture divide, as humans remain, by definition, on their side of the picture, and nature, ever productive and sumbissive to man's will, on its.
So to answer your second question, according to conventional cultural wisdom: no, humans are not "part fo the nature". Because we are human. To suggest otherwise is to overturn millennia of how people have formulated their thoughts and their culture, which is not necessarily a bad or wrong thing to do, just a lot harder than you might think.
Gotta love them pre-historic dinosaurs!
BTW, if you get the novel up, I hear there're studios clamouring for the film rights to books like that...