|
|
 Up |
  |
Author: Art DecoArt Deco
Date: Dec 31, 2006 21:15
Forwarded to relevant sci.* groups as there are quite a number of
notorious science kooks on the ballot this month. Anyone (almost) may
vote, but valid ballots must be cross-posted to alt.usenet.kooks in
this same thread.
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler netcabal.com> wrote:
>Here follows the one true ballot for the December 2006 Usenet Kook
>Awards. Anybody may vote, but your votes may be disqualified, mocked,
>burnt, shredded and/or recycled for use as toilet paper or filler...
|
| Show full article (3.96Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: George DishmanGeorge Dishman
Date: Dec 31, 2006 17:52
Lester Zick wrote:
> On 31 Dec 2006 03:47:48 -0800, "George Dishman"
> briar.demon.co.uk> wrote:>>"Lester Zick" nowhere.net> wrote in message
>>news:idsap2ta307a9f0ihr5qfhd8g41239vjof@4ax.com...>>> On 29 Dec 2006 03:54:29 -0800, "George Dishman"
>>> briar.demon.co.uk> wrote:...
> I'm pretty concerned with accessablity and turnaround here, George. A
> lot of people who might otherwise be interested would be turned off by
> the length. What I'd like to suggest is instead of trying to reply to
> a whole message all at once just replying to isolated topics instead
> but covering all the issues raised in sequence. At least that's the
> only way I can think of to do justice to all the issues raised. If
> you're agreeable I'd like to try that on the next go round...
|
| Show full article (4.26Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: RobRob
Date: Dec 31, 2006 17:29
Rob wrote:
> Joseph Lazio wrote:
>
>> Ever heard of N rays? The history of science is littered with
>> examples of people who were quite sure that they had discovered
>> something new.
>
> And equally full of moronic scientists and professors who did their
> best to stop the advance of science. For example, Lord Kelvin who used
> physics to prove that Darwinian Evolution could not possibly be right.
> Or how about Ernst Mach who thought atoms were "poppycock". The list is
> very long. For every misguided "discover" there is at least one
> thoroughly obnoxious "gatekeeper" who has appointed himself to keep
> science "pure" and does not realize that he is a scientific fascist.
Just wanted to make sure you got a second chance to think about the
comment immediately above.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: RobRob
Date: Dec 31, 2006 17:16
Allan Adler wrote:
>
> I just tried again from someone else's computer, this one running Debian
> Linux, based on kernel 2.4.23, using the lynx browser. Of course, lynx is
> text oriented, but it was perfectly capable of downloading the two papers.
> When I used the resident unzip to try to unzip them, I got the same
> error messages I got on my own computer. When the smoke cleared, it turns
> out there were two pdf files produced by the process. However, when I tried
> to read them, I got error messages from xpdf (the pdf reader) to the effect
> that pdf files are damaged, so it couldn't read them.
First a simple question. Why not highlight the text you want and then
click the print icon?
Presto, you get whatever you want.
A second simple question. Do you have a friend who has a PC running
Microsoft software?
Maybe the first question should be the second question and vice versa?
A third question. What percentage of computer users have the
difficulties you are experiencing?
Rob
|
| |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Lester ZickLester Zick
Date: Dec 31, 2006 17:16
On 31 Dec 2006 03:47:48 -0800, "George Dishman"
briar.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Lester Zick" nowhere.net> wrote in message
>news:idsap2ta307a9f0ihr5qfhd8g41239vjof@4ax.com...
[. . .] reply to second part of message.
>"Lester Zick" nowhere.net> wrote in message
>news:ac6bp2512f1s9ckndhvtrabq9ahrkgok0m@4ax.com...>> On 29 Dec 2006 03:54:29 -0800, "George Dishman"
>...
>>>>>>>>SR explains that change of length...
|
| Show full article (17.91Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: RobRob
Date: Dec 31, 2006 17:06
Rob wrote:
>
> I'll be back after I read the full post.
Well, I have now read the full post and find myself a bit at a loss for
words.
I think it might be a good idea to establish a simple, well-defined,
common ground to act as a starting point for a discussion of fractals
and self-similarity.
The Fournier d'Albe fractal design might serve us well. It is easily
found in Mandelbrot's book and its properties can be learned from the
pictures of it and the text - a 15-min read.
Then we could discuss issues like:
Is the design aesthetically pleasing?
Is it, from a formal mathematical point of view, a true fractal?
Do fractals have to have continuous self-similarity?
Is it ok to say the number of scales in the FdA fractal are countably
infinite, as opposed to uncountably infinite?
|
| Show full article (1.17Kb) |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Non-Atheist AstronomerNon-Atheist Astronomer
Date: Dec 31, 2006 16:08
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Since our most scientific polls show that approximately nine
out of every ten Americans are Non-Atheists, here're several
good New Year's resolutions you should make and keep in 2007,
and for every single day of your life thereafter & hereafter...
Since Anti-Christian (IL)Liberalism & Anti-Christian Atheism
are such close cousins, remember to oppose Liberals/Atheists
at all times, and in all places both public and private. :-D
Just remember that Non-Liberals/Non-Atheists obey the law of
the land. Unlike Liberal Atheists who are pathological Liars,
Cowards and Murderers; we the God-fearing, law-abiding, hard-
& smart-working, tax-paying citizens will *DESTROY* Liberals
& Atheists through our U.S. Supreme Court, and by boycotting
Liberals & Atheists across-the-board. Never hire them, never
befriend them, never do business with them, and never engage
in conversation with them on a friendly basis. Atheists and
Liberals are *not* our friends, but they are our sworn enemy!
|
| Show full article (4.54Kb) |
|
3 Comments |
|
|
Author: JerryJerry
Date: Dec 31, 2006 15:23
Henri Wilson wrote:
> On 30 Dec 2006 14:37:23 -0800, "Jerry" comcast.net> wrote:
>>>Henri Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, a truce is called.
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>Nevertheless, I totally disagree with your "40-50 degrees" statement.
>>>
>>> Naturally you would.
>>>
>>>>When I examine Johnson's plot of Duncan's velocity data, I see the
>>>>radial velocity peak at about 0.2 days after the brightness maximum.
>>>> http://mb-soft.com/public2/cepheid9.gif
>>>>
>>>>Given a period of 3.73 days, this translates into the radial velocity
>>>>peak lagging the brightness maximum by 19 degrees. >>> ...
|
| Show full article (7.19Kb) |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: G=EMC^2 GlazierG=EMC^2 Glazier
Date: Dec 31, 2006 12:04
They don't wear stockings They get no presents,and get little sex(no
mistletoe) Bert
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
