Re: Is there evidence of design?/Re: Vatican/Re: Genes contribute to patriotism and group loyality

From: janice matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon Nov 14 2005 - 13:30:23 EST

Three replies below: To Jack Haas , George Murphy, and Rich Faussette

[1] To Jack Haas - Re: Genes contribute to patriotism and group loyality

At 12:16 PM 11/14/2005, Jack Haas wrote:
>Greetings:
>Re: Genes contribute to patriotism and group loyality
>Are any of you familiar with the "research" that supports this kind of
>thinking? Jack Haas

### Yes. It's described here:

Science Policy in the 21st
Century http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote08.html
~ Janice

[2] To George Murphy - Re: Is there evidence of design?

At 12:22 PM 11/14/2005, George Murphy wrote:
>Crichton's statement that the Drake equation is "pure speculation in
>scientific trappings" is 100% wrong. The equation is in fact quite
>rigorous, stating that the number of extant advanced technical
>civilizations in the galaxy is the product of a number of factors that
>would determine whether such civilizations could come into being and how
>long they would survive. Where speculation enters is in knowing what
>numbers to put into the equations for some of these factors, because we
>simply don't the probability of life developing on a suitable planet or
>the probability of intelligence emerging if life does. We don't even know
>if our estimates are very conservative or very generous.
>
>Crichton should stick to fiction.
>Shalom George
><http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/>http<http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/>://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

### " ...Where speculation enters is in knowing what numbers to put into
the equations..."~ George "the fiction expert" Murphy

Crighton:
  "..... the Drake equation can have any value from "billions and billions"
to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking
precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to
do with science. Excerpted from: "Aliens Cause Global Warming" A
lecture by Michael Crichton California Institute of Technology Pasadena,
CA January 17,
2003 http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote04.html
~ Janice

[3] To Rich Faussette: Re: Vatican

At 12:20 PM 11/14/2005, RFaussette@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 11/14/2005 11:54:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>panterragroup@mindspring.com writes:
>Hmm, don't like the word novel, how about just bizzare?
>
>How about you do a little more reading to expand your horizons. ... ~
>rich faussette

### Like others, he may not want to expand his horizons into an
ultra-left direction.

Scholem taught the Kabbalah and mysticism from a scientific point of view.

Scholem's brother Werner was a member of the ultra-left "Fischer-Maslow
Group" and a member of the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Reichstag_%28institution%29>Reichstag,
representing the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Communist>Communist
Party (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/KPD>KPD) in the German parliament.

It is important to note that no scholars of classical
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Judaism>Judaism from within
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Orthodox_Judaism>Orthodox or
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Haredi_Judaism>Haredi Judaism, the
original sources of all classical knowledges about the Kabbalah, either
approved of Scholem or validated his ideas and writings. ...

In the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Weltanschauung>Weltanschauung of
Scholem, the research of Jewish mysticism could not be separated from its
historical context. Starting from something similar to the Gegengeschichte
of <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche>Friedrich
Nietzsche he ended up including a lot of the less normative aspects of the
Judaism in the public history.

More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gershom_Scholem

~ Janice
Received on Mon Nov 14 18:40:42 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 14 2005 - 18:40:42 EST