20-Sep-13 World View -- Syria moves its chemical weapons

[at99sy]

Ya know Gerald, I think I read this gal's first book: Johnathan Livingston Seagull.

Once consumed, you won't be offended if I don't explicitly reference this doc to substantiate any future point I might try to make, will you?

JLS- written by Richard Back or Brach I think. Read this when I hiked the Appalachian Trail in 1999. Very unusual book to read when you have 2000 miles of thinking to do.

sy

[gerald]

Ya know Gerald, I think I read this gal's first book: Johnathan Livingston Seagull.

Once consumed, you won't be offended if I don't explicitly reference this doc to substantiate any future point I might try to make, will you?

JLS- written by Richard Back or Brach I think. Read this when I hiked the Appalachian Trail in 1999. Very unusual book to read when you have 2000 miles of thinking to do.

sy

Jonathan Livingston Seagull, written by Richard Bach, yes an interesting read

[NoOneImportant]

Gerald, the book is truly unusual. Tin hat? Perhaps, but didn't the world used to be flat? Or the Earth the center of the Solar System?

There are things that I can know, and there are things that I can't know. Regarding the things that I can't know, if I can't know them how can I assert that what I can't know must be something about which I have no understanding. Now having said that, a physics textbook will show me how to measure the mass of an electron, or the mass of any particular molecule with definition and within limited certainty.

I will listen, consider, then "place on the shelf" that which I can't corroborate. It will remain "on the shelf" until I, over time, obtain either denial, or sufficient corroboration to permit me to, with some level of surety, move what is "on the shelf" into the known basket. Before that time the shelf item remains a mere contention - not a fact, and as such is justification for nothing.

However as I noted above I won't be referencing this doc. for any of my comment points, or issues. It is an engaging read, but so also was Kafka's Metamorphosis - and I don't expect to wake up as a giant bug in the morning. Thanks for the reference, it's both entertaining, and interesting. It is also interesting to note that when you listen to the propeller-heads discount, denigrate, and ridicule any belief in alien life or UFOs, it is a point of fact that virtually every trans-planetary space probe, since the beginning of the space program, has carried a smorgasbord of experimentation looking for non-terrestrial life. My simple question is: do they believe, or do they not? If they believe admit the position that extra-terrestrial has a high probability of existing; or if they don't believe then quit wasting treasured space, and enormous amounts of money on these probes looking for life. Is it not in fact the height of arrogance that they spend billions looking for lower life, and nothing looking for higher life, But then again, are we not, indeed and in fact, the center of the Solar System? /sarc off .

[gerald]

Gerald, the book is truly unusual. Tin hat? Perhaps, but didn't the world used to be flat? Or the Earth the center of the Solar System?

There are things that I can know, and there are things that I can't know. Regarding the things that I can't know, if I can't know them how can I assert that what I can't know must be something about which I have no understanding. Now having said that, a physics textbook will show me how to measure the mass of an electron, or the mass of any particular molecule with definition and within limited certainty.

I will listen, consider, then "place on the shelf" that which I can't corroborate. It will remain "on the shelf" until I, over time, obtain either denial, or sufficient corroboration to permit me to, with some level of surety, move what is "on the shelf" into the known basket. Before that time the shelf item remains a mere contention - not a fact, and as such is justification for nothing.

However as I noted above I won't be referencing this doc. for any of my comment points, or issues. It is an engaging read, but so also was Kafka's Metamorphosis - and I don't expect to wake up as a giant bug in the morning. Thanks for the reference, it's both entertaining, and interesting. It is also interesting to note that when you listen to the propeller-heads discount, denigrate, and ridicule any belief in alien life or UFOs, it is a point of fact that virtually every trans-planetary space probe, since the beginning of the space program, has carried a smorgasbord of experimentation looking for non-terrestrial life. My simple question is: do they believe, or do they not? If they believe admit the position that extra-terrestrial has a high probability of existing; or if they don't believe then quit wasting treasured space, and enormous amounts of money on these probes looking for life. Is it not in fact the height of arrogance that they spend billions looking for lower life, and nothing looking for higher life, But then again, are we not, indeed and in fact, the center of the Solar System? /sarc off .

I am glad you found the book "interesting." From the suspicious observers site --- http://www.suspicious0bservers.org/ they have a topic called "starwater". Apparently water is quite common in space and that it can be created in deep space. Indications are that components of molecular biology can also be created in deep space and in a wider range of temperatures and pressures than previously thought. If so, it would seem logical then that "life" whatever that is, and intelligent life, could be more common than anticipated , even very common. --- we may be forced to reevaluate our selves.

[gerald]

Gerald, the book is truly unusual. Tin hat? Perhaps, but didn't the world used to be flat? Or the Earth the center of the Solar System?

There are things that I can know, and there are things that I can't know. Regarding the things that I can't know, if I can't know them how can I assert that what I can't know must be something about which I have no understanding. Now having said that, a physics textbook will show me how to measure the mass of an electron, or the mass of any particular molecule with definition and within limited certainty.

I will listen, consider, then "place on the shelf" that which I can't corroborate. It will remain "on the shelf" until I, over time, obtain either denial, or sufficient corroboration to permit me to, with some level of surety, move what is "on the shelf" into the known basket. Before that time the shelf item remains a mere contention - not a fact, and as such is justification for nothing.

However as I noted above I won't be referencing this doc. for any of my comment points, or issues. It is an engaging read, but so also was Kafka's Metamorphosis - and I don't expect to wake up as a giant bug in the morning. Thanks for the reference, it's both entertaining, and interesting. It is also interesting to note that when you listen to the propeller-heads discount, denigrate, and ridicule any belief in alien life or UFOs, it is a point of fact that virtually every trans-planetary space probe, since the beginning of the space program, has carried a smorgasbord of experimentation looking for non-terrestrial life. My simple question is: do they believe, or do they not? If they believe admit the position that extra-terrestrial has a high probability of existing; or if they don't believe then quit wasting treasured space, and enormous amounts of money on these probes looking for life. Is it not in fact the height of arrogance that they spend billions looking for lower life, and nothing looking for higher life, But then again, are we not, indeed and in fact, the center of the Solar System? /sarc off .

I am glad you found the book "interesting." From the suspicious observers site --- http://www.suspicious0bservers.org/ they have a topic called "starwater". Apparently water is quite common in space and that it can be created in deep space. Indications are that components of molecular biology can also be created in deep space and in a wider range of temperatures and pressures than previously thought. If so, it would seem logical then that "life" whatever that is, and intelligent life, could be more common than anticipated , even very common. --- we may be forced to reevaluate our selves.

For your amusement - a short 4 minute video apparently of a congressional committee posted Sept. 2, 2013 -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83v5Rgeu2Yc