Al Those Great Scientists Here

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Paul G. wrote:
> To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living can
> only exist in contrast to the idea of dead. If one ceases to exist, so
> does the other. The question is, because they both need the other to
> exist, does it really matter which one you are?

I've been in races where I seem to have flip-flopped between the two
states.

On May 15, 1:03 am, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
wrote:

> > > Samuel Johnson [...] said, "Thus do I refute Berkeley."
>
> > I know a guy who was told he had little chance of getting tenure here.
> > He sought, received, and accepted an offer from that school down the
> > peninsula. He said something very much like Johnson.
>
> Only with what the Times refers to as "an Anglo-Saxon
> epithet," I hope.
> Which school, UCSC, SJSU? Stanford? Going
> from Berkeley to Stanford, some would consider that
> a step down. While there are many junior colleges in
> the US of A, there is only one junior university,
> Leland Stanford Junior University.

UCSC isn't "down the peninsula," it's "over the hill." I don't want to
say anything bad about SJS since they were kind enough to employ me
for a while but I wouldn't call it "down the peninsula" either; I
think I might describe it as "in the armpit of the Bay." Tenure
decisions are odd because they're mostly made at the department level
and, frankly, this guy was a poor fit for his department at Berkeley.
His move to the Junior University improved both departments.

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
> On May 14, 4:20 pm, William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Bret wrote:
>>> You sound like the desperate defense lawyer in an extortion case where
>>> I was on the jury. The FBI had phone recordings of multiple explicit
>>> threats and tons of other evidence. The lawyer tried to build a
>>> defense out of minor inconsistencies elsewhere in the evidence and
>>> argued "How can you convict when we don't know what really happened"?
>>> I had the hubris to vote for conviction being the law and order
>>> liberal that I am.
>> Oh christ, now you're going to start Greg up on this.
>
> There was plenty of evidence to convict you of dumbassy

My spell check doesn't like this. It doesn't like dumbassery either,
but I do.

Steve


and so I did.
>
> I'm not the pettifogging dumbass who gave birth to Ben Franklin, but I
> was there when it happened.
>


--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT), "Paul G."
<carbide@egine.com> wrote:

>On May 15, 8:17 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> In much the same way, the idea of conservative can only exist in
>> contrast to the idea of liberal. If one ceases to exist, so does the
>> other. The question is, because they both need the other to exist,
>> does it really matter which one you are?
>
>To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living
>can only exist in contrast to the idea of dead. If one ceases to
>exist, so does the other. The question is, because they both need the
>other to exist, does it really matter which one you are?
>
>It matters to me.

I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
dead. For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
alive.

On May 15, 2:48 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT), "Paul G."
>
> <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> >On May 15, 8:17 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> In much the same way, the idea of conservative can only exist in
> >> contrast to the idea of liberal.  If one ceases to exist, so does the
> >> other.  The question is, because they both need the other to exist,
> >> does it really matter which one you are?
>
> >To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living
> >can only exist in contrast to the idea of dead.  If one ceases to
> >exist, so does the other.  The question is, because they both need the
> >other to exist, does it really matter which one you are?
>
> >It matters to me.
>
> I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> dead.  For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> alive.

You make it sound as though there is a 50-50 chance that death is
better. It doesn't work that way.

On May 15, 1:48 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT), "Paul G."
> <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> >On May 15, 8:17 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living
> >can only exist in contrast to the idea of dead. If one ceases to
> >exist, so does the other. The question is, because they both need the
> >other to exist, does it really matter which one you are?
>
> >It matters to me.
>
> I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> dead. For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> alive.

To get back on the topic of global warming, this argument
is a lot like the "Maybe global warming is happening, but
we need to study it for another 50 years before deciding
whether to do anything about it" argument.

Ben
Some studies claim that rich people aren't any happier
than poor people. If you haven't been both rich and poor,
how can you know which one is better?

On the other hand, Mae West said "I've been rich and
I've been poor, and rich is better." So if you are willing
to take on faith the testimony of an expert, there you go.
Now all we need is the testimony of someone who's been
alive and dead. Does anyone have Jesus's cell number?

<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote in message
news:3f2a74ed-01a9-4b74-bd20-80daf823cc9d@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
>
> To get back on the topic of global warming, this argument
> is a lot like the "Maybe global warming is happening, but
> we need to study it for another 50 years before deciding
> whether to do anything about it" argument.

Of course we can't do anything about it and it is a natural process that has
a long historical record that you don't seem to want to believe.....

On May 15, 5:03 pm, Bret <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> > dead.  For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> > alive.
>
> You make it sound as though there is a 50-50 chance that death is
> better. It doesn't work that way.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How does it work? I don't know anyone who has any credible evidence
one way or the other, and even if being dead is simply non-existance
how is that not better in many cases?
Bill C

On May 15, 1:48 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT), "Paul G."
>
> <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> >On May 15, 8:17 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> In much the same way, the idea of conservative can only exist in
> >> contrast to the idea of liberal. If one ceases to exist, so does the
> >> other. The question is, because they both need the other to exist,
> >> does it really matter which one you are?
>
> >To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living
> >can only exist in contrast to the idea of dead. If one ceases to
> >exist, so does the other. The question is, because they both need the
> >other to exist, does it really matter which one you are?
>
> >It matters to me.
>
> I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> dead. For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> alive.

I'll take my chances since I have it pretty good with the status quo.
Besides, I'm going to be dead for a lot longer than I'll have been
alive, so what's the rush? The marginal utility of more "dead time" is
insignificant.

I have a relative by marriage who's a Baptist minister and a bit of a
health nut. I've teased him about that- "The sooner you die the sooner
you get to heaven. So why are you taking those vitamins?" He just
grinned.

Now those Muslim suicide guys have the right idea. Their lives suck,
then *BOOM!* they're in paradise humping 72 virgins. It's no wonder
they have to have a "take a number" machine at suicide HQ.
-Paul

On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:28:50 -0700 (PDT), "bjw@mambo.ucolick.org"
<bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote:

>On the other hand, Mae West said "I've been rich and
>I've been poor, and rich is better."

I grew up in a poor family and, by some definitions, I could now be
classified as rich, or at worst upper middle class and I can say
without doubt that it's better to have money.

However, to fully appreciate money it's best to have been through a
period when you didn't have any. My children, who have always had
everything they want, have no idea how lucky they are and really don't
appreciate what they have.

On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:51:00 -0700 (PDT), Bill C
<tritonrider@verizon.net> wrote:

>> You make it sound as though there is a 50-50 chance that death is
>> better. It doesn't work that way.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>How does it work? I don't know anyone who has any credible evidence
>one way or the other, and even if being dead is simply non-existance
>how is that not better in many cases?
> Bill C

I'm sure there are a lot of people who would be glad to settle for
oblivion.

In article
<3f2a74ed-01a9-4b74-bd20-80daf823cc9d@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
"bjw@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjw@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote:

> On May 15, 1:48 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 May 2008 09:13:56 -0700 (PDT), "Paul G."
> > <carb...@egine.com> wrote:
> > >On May 15, 8:17 am, Jack Hollis <xslee...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >To paraphrase your sophistry: In much the same way, the idea of living
> > >can only exist in contrast to the idea of dead. If one ceases to
> > >exist, so does the other. The question is, because they both need the
> > >other to exist, does it really matter which one you are?
> >
> > >It matters to me.
> >
> > I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> > dead. For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> > alive.
>
> To get back on the topic of global warming, this argument
> is a lot like the "Maybe global warming is happening, but
> we need to study it for another 50 years before deciding
> whether to do anything about it" argument.
>
> Ben
> Some studies claim that rich people aren't any happier
> than poor people. If you haven't been both rich and poor,
> how can you know which one is better?
>
> On the other hand, Mae West said "I've been rich and
> I've been poor, and rich is better." So if you are willing
> to take on faith the testimony of an expert, there you go.
> Now all we need is the testimony of someone who's been
> alive and dead. Does anyone have Jesus's cell number?

The numbers I'm aware of speak of a rapidly diminishing marginal value
of money.

Which is to say, the first $50k/a is the best.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cikp249oqsiooh02jk0i3p59sf67souno6@4ax.com...
>
> However, to fully appreciate money it's best to have been through a
> period when you didn't have any. My children, who have always had
> everything they want, have no idea how lucky they are and really don't
> appreciate what they have.

Can you imagine what sort of mind allows itself to win tens or hundreds of
millions of dollars and then loses it all within a decade? Every last dime?

On May 15, 6:28 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> Can you imagine what sort of mind allows itself to win tens or hundreds of
> millions of dollars and then loses it all within a decade?

The kind of mind who'd think giving up golf would show solidarity with
grieving families?

"Robert Chung" <rechung@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:77c2454a-526b-42f9-ad96-fc88ff3efcb7@i36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 15, 6:28 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> Can you imagine what sort of mind allows itself to win tens or hundreds
>> of
>> millions of dollars and then loses it all within a decade?
>
> The kind of mind who'd think giving up golf would show solidarity with
> grieving families?

How about the kind who would purposely misrepresent what was happening
purely to make a political point?

Robert, you started out an intelligent scientist on this group and have
become a small and silly child.

On May 15, 5:51 pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On May 15, 5:03 pm, Bret <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I don't think you can really say, one way or the other, until you're
> > > dead.  For all you know, being dead might be a lot better than being
> > > alive.
>
> > You make it sound as though there is a 50-50 chance that death is
> > better. It doesn't work that way.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> How does it work? I don't know anyone who has any credible evidence
> one way or the other, and even if being dead is simply non-existance
> how is that not better in many cases?
>  Bill C

My point was that just because something can't be proven wrong, that
doesn't mean that there is a 50-50 chance it is true. That's a common
fallacy. I may wake up tomorrow from this bad dream and find that I am
the king of the universe. You can't prove that wrong. That doesn't
mean it's very likely.

Bret

On May 15, 9:50 pm, Bret <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 15, 6:44 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  Bret <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Anyone would have convicted this guy. The story would make a great
> > > Coen Brothers movie. I'd tell it here but I wouldn't want the guy to
> > > google himself some day and then decide to come after me.
>
> > Just use a pseudonym for him. I suggest "Tony Soprano."
>
>
> Better than that. His name was ohney-Jay aze-Blay.

This guy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Rider_(Johnny_Blaze)
http://www.marvel.com/universe/Ghost_Rider_(John_Blaze)

I wouldn't have voted to convict him, myself.
It's not because I'm a bleeding heart liberal. It's
because I'm a bleeding heart liberal _and_ a
coward who's scared of people with flaming skulls
for heads.

Ben

P.S. Did you know that the Wikipedia "Ghost Rider"
entry is the same length as, for example, its
"Philip Roth" entry? And the Roth entry is half lists.

On May 15, 10:25 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
wrote:

> P.S. Did you know that the Wikipedia "Ghost Rider"
> entry is the same length as, for example, its
> "Philip Roth" entry? And the Roth entry is half lists.

You insinuating that Philip Roth was a ghost writer?

In article <05c4eb2d-04ef-46f0-87d0-f9f227d298e6@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
Bret <bret.wade@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 8, 11:50 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bb78e344-0cc3-4681-9e64-134f7271e...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >  Bret <bret.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 8, 9:41 pm, Howard Kveck <YOURhow...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <482314ac$0$14355$e4fe5...@news.xs4all.nl>,
> > > >  Ted van de Weteringe <myfulln...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> > > > > > "reality-based community"---I love it!  When do we move?
> >
> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
> >
> > > >    I'm betting on the aide in question being Karl Rove.
> >
> > > I think it was Douglas Feith. I do hope we find out some day.
> >
> >    You know, Feith is also a good choice. But it sounds so Rovian to me -
> > similar to his comment to NPR host Robert Siegel about the then-impending '06
> > elections: "You may end up with a different math, but you're entitled to your
> > math. I'm entitled to 'the' math."
>
> The more I think about it the more it sounds like someone on a manic
> high. I once had a housemate that was an undiagnosed manic depressive.
> Their behavior became increasingly erratic until they were confronted
> by the household. We were told that we just didn't understand what it
> was like to be perfect. Things went downhill from there. Police,
> hospital, lithium, bus ticket home to live with parents. Our landlord
> was manic depressive himself and totally understood.

Wow, what an unpleasant living situation. I hope things got better for this
person. Anyway, while I agree that a person on a manic high could say the sort of
thing we're talking about, I don't really think that's the case here as it nicely
fits into a pattern of high hubris level comments and actions by Bush admin. people,
many of which have later been proven to be incredibly poorly thought out. Rove's
comment above is a good example.

--
tanx,
Howard

Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Jack Hollis wrote:
> I'm sure there are a lot of people who would be glad to settle for
> oblivion.

Ah yes, Sisyphus again. Better than an eternity arguing with a bot.