mr d

hello a quick answer would be anything we see is normal size, for our particular vision parameters. if you were born with eyes that saw at 10x what you have then would be your normal vision. size of objects- distance is a devise designed by humans for reference. also if you were to put on a pair of 10x googles and where them about, your understanding of what you saw would adjust to take that in as your normal vision. mr d

hello a brief background (please consult a site like wikipedia for a more indepth history). the area we think of as iraq was carved out of the old ottoman-turk empire after the 1st world war as a british mandate. it aquired independence as a nation in the late thirds, but pro-nazi leanings during wwii lead to re-occupation by the british who setup a monarchy based on rulers from the ottoman days. in 1958 a military coup' overthrew the monarchy, with various military leaders ruling, and over throwing each other till the late 60's when the ba'ath party came to power amoung whom was suddam. the country is made up of 3 main ethnic-religious groups. kurds in the north, sunnis in central iraq, and shi'ites in the south. sunnis have had main conrol over the nation, with both kurdish and shi'ite groups looking for independant nations. (perhaps some one could explain difference between sunni and shi'ite believes, through both are islamic). so it is best think of iraq as composed of three groups that were declared a country by western powers after the world wars. a somewhat simular european counter part being the former nation of yugoslavia, a collection of smaller nations formed into a single nation by the communist backed joseph tito in the 40's. and unforunately as in both places yugoslavia and iraq to hold them together as nations a strong leader with a large military and forceful internal security police is what is needed to hold those types of nations together. europe saw what happen to yugoslavia after tito's death, and with suddam gone will now see a simular situation in iraq. where groups based upon ethic and religious allignment seek to form their own nations instead of remaining as one. in iraq there may have been, and still maybe, a chance of the formation of a multicultural nation. but fundamentalist forces when failing to unite the nation in a war to expell the americans(coalition) have decided to incite a civil war and break apart the nation instead. better to get to rule a new smaller nation than none at all i think would be their reasoning. mr d

hello any recently publicationed material dealing with dark matter and gravitational forces, or dark matter and electromagnetic fields, put forth and worth a read. mr d

hello one thing first, as my first responce was directed at bascule, are you a different fellow or a new name? and if new i take it you too are a believer in this idea? first off about the nano thing, sorry we are not nano's. as nanos referrers to objects the size of a nanometer. i grant you compared to the rest of the cosmos we are rather small in size. but referrence is to bascules mention of nano sizing ourself so space travel might become possible. energy required for weight, that kind of thing. secondly you compare senses to simple electrical impulses, which i concur they are. however how those impulses create feeling and sensations in humans is quite complex and no simple impulses we've devised to mimic human think have in any way approached feelings and emotions, nor sensations in a human sense. and it is still debated whether machine ever can. simply enjoying a meal envolves the senses of sight-taste-smell, your mouth helps determine hot-cold, sweet-bitter-salty. as a neural net creation you would have none of that ability. as to the computer allowing access to vast stores of knowledge. very little knowlegde is available, and what is is charged for. and a main reason most of it is not available is simply because people have no interest in it. and how you would love to read your books (please don't call him a monkey) at the library. if you where such a coillective creation, others would have already read those books or the information would simply already be there inside your head. you would have no need to read anything, you would already know it. as to tedium. most individuals who live into their hundreds simply lie down and pass away because as many of them say they are tired of live and have done enough. what do you do if your this immortal neural collective, and your tired of it all and want to die. can you, will the rest of the collective allow you to. what if part of your mind is needed to run a vital system would you be forced to survive. and if you were allowed to die could you truely do so if you collective knowledge is shared by all. could you inforce upon other that they must delete your electrical essence so that no part of you would survive. or what if you simply wish to leave the collective. for that matter how could you exist as an individual, all your thoughts would be freely available. can you shut yourself off from others accessing you. would you really be you, or just the sum of collective thoughts and how would you know the difference. and if one consciousness is shared by all, what happens if one of those minds loses sanity, then there would be the chance all would. and you say i could climb imaginary mountains created in this silicon neural world. what if i wish to climb a mountain in the real world what body do i have to accomplish that with. a nanobot self. could that reproduce the sensations of climbing, create the feeling of wind on your face or the trickle of sweat. would i feel my electronic heart and lungs struggling harder at altitude. as too that replication part, and there being something better. well sorry but i'm an old fashion bloke. though if you and other did wish to become this non-human creation, for in giving up your bodies i don't see how you could still truely be called human, i gladly place you in the accellerator and wave a hearty farewell as you went off to begin a new existance out amoung the stars. mr d

hello i think some may miss the point. that being that films and shows produced by countries often can show how they think of themselves or others. example: many americans would pick john wayne and a number of his films as depicting the american spirit of rugged individualism. how americans view themselves as a people. so the question is what film or tv show do you feel would give a person in another country the essence of how your country views itself. what theme or character respresents to you the truely how you feel about your country, or more accurately your nation's character as a people. conversely what film or tv show produced by your nation depicts how you view the people (character traits) of another nation. i have noticed a number of british respondants, but most site american produced shows as to how americans are. but what shows does your country produce that displays those concepts? if and american was to show up in a british production, how would you indentify them as american. mr d

hello agree with dr quark. but it does i believe it may show that there may be some form of temperture regulation system already inplace on planet earth. involving wind currents, weather patterns, ocean currents, volcanic activity ... one part of the equation can effect the others, and the earth's temperature system can suffer from human activity. and it would be in our interest to modify our actiivties until that system can be better understood. mankind is not above extinction mr d

hello interesting idea, but affraid i'd decline the opprotunity to be nano sized. think a part of being human is individuality, and that not existing as a collective. though i guess as a trans human you are putting forward that the human state is only transitory. sounds rather like the borg - cyborgs of star trek. plus tend to perfer having a body with senses that allow me to enjoy the taste of a good drink or flavor of a finely prepared meal. see no great value to becoming simply a calculating machine. plus as a shared collective all knowledge gained by others would be instantly available to you. while there are some intriguing aspects to that, it aslo means elimination to a personal quest for knowledge. no need for your to climb that hill to see what's on the other side, just find that information already added to the collective and read it. as to eternal life, fear of death does make that appealing, however i am reminded of the jonathan swift stories of gulliver's travels. where he goes to the land where people have no natural death, and all the ten thousand year people sit around looking longingly at those who have died for at least their tedium of being alife is over. guess i'm for treading my time upon the stage then take my bow and exit. curiousity, as you say the idea is that you digitized mind gets shared amoung a multitude of nanos. do you still get to exist as an individual, or is all that remains of you is random bits of code shared by some enormous collective consciousness. and lastly i think you'd have a problem with that self replicating bit. believe many people find the old system of replicating to be just dandy. and if i may, why does this futre appeal to you/ mr d

hello well yes it is, but we like it that way! keeps things from getting boring. but since your location lists uk as location, how do you view the british. mr d

hello just a starting point, but look into the north atlantic conveyer, and undersea river (current). http://www.firstscience.com/site/articles/gribbin.asp mentioned this before dealing with global warming, but most people seemed to think i was trying to use it as a ways to dismiss warming, but research the subject and you'll find it deals more with a cyclic system that deals with warming and cooling. and how global warming now may later trigger a large temperature drop in europe. mr d

hello well i must say to a certain extent yes. think it has a lot to do with how people are portrayed in tv and film. in the u.s. what shows come over the pond are comedys like monty python, keeping up appearences, are you being served, mr bean, and red dwarf. or the masterpiece theater productions of numerous jane austin novels. so the british you see are twits, tough cockney's and the rather effininate british upper class males. sort of like in the british war movies where the main bulk of soldiers are lower class fellows, the officer upperclass and rather ineffectual. with a tough sarget-major who holds it all together. with most shows having a feeling of class distinction definitely present. just as when you see british shows with americans portrayed there usually loud, unkept, and unshaven. often puffing on a cigarette or stoggie. mr d

hello thank you for reply. but if i may, how as a person of the law would you feel about dna samples being taken before you are even charged with a crime? in your opinion does that border on violating the presumed innocence that is suppose to prevail in the american justice system. thank you mr d

hello no not the cops as persons (let's say for sake of ease they are), but most of our illustrious guest stars on 'cops' the show. plus not only can you see how the best dress trailer devotee' attire themselves, but young ladies can pick up wonderous makeup tips from the numerous transvestites and transsexuals that grace the 'cops' stage. mr d 'cops' for america but any for the rest of the world?

hello but cops has helped the undergarmet industry. in the 40's the movie 'it happened one night' had clark gable changing shirts, and when he took his off and wasn't wearing an undershirt sales of such garmets for men plunged. now with cops we get to see how sheik a 'wifebeater' can be, though you must remember to accessorize with beer can and lip dangling cigarette. and sales for them are on the increase around the world. so any folks out there from the continent wish to comment. how do you french, germans, russians see your self and others? What about our south asia friends or blokes from down under percieve their neighbors. please give a little on where your point is coming from if you would though (ie: nation-people). saw the french animated film 'triplets of belleville' where even they had every one eating frogs. and oddly they had to rescue an imprisoned cyclist taken to a unnamed far away country run by the mafia where every one was quite obese. mr d

hello since i'm from the u.s. and know a lot of you are from else where, was wondering this. a lot of people on the forum say how they don't understand the people of an other nation, or ask 'why do they act that way.'. so before i've got to stop dropping by so often and get back to work (funding good), thought i'd pick up a few suggestions on the matter of some films or tv shows along the following theme. if someone wished to understand the people of your country better what films or tv shows do you suggest they watch. i imagine fairly commercial films that stand a better chance of being available in other countries. also films and tv shows that reveal how your country thinks about people of another. example: what are americans like. i'd suggest 2 westerns tombstone with kurt russel. story of the shoot out at the o.k. corral. and open range with kevin costner. free grazers verse the cattle baron. and an older war-black comedy kelly's heroes with clint eastwood. americans stealing nazi gold for personal gain (feels more american to me then the later three king's with george clunny, along the same theme). so how do americans picture brits: two tv shows come to mind. brideshead revisited, and keeping up appearances. though i personally prefer bob hoskins in the long good friday. the french: the pink panther films by blake edwards starring the great british actor peter sellers (not the bore fest recently done by steve martin). the french are the inspector imbodied by a nation. through many also like reno as leon the professional. any suggestions for watching? mr d and happy july 5th birthday to one of the greatest americans to ever live Mr P. T. Barnum!!!

hello thanks to all for replys. one question though, being a bit older than most dwellers in this pit, i was raised at a time when the more common view would have been 'don't trust the man.'. with any information. yet notice that with your individuals more acustum to growing up with the internet, they seem less carrying in save guarding personal information. how do you younger folks feel? mr d

hello thank you for replying. just wondering if boiling holds true for teeth and dna. thank you mr d

hello remember though that the court ruled based on the president over extended his powers by first not getting the approval of congress to set up the tribunals. not that tribunals are as such illegal. no doubt bush is already starting plans to get that approval, however with elections coming up in november, and many americans now in favor of closing gitmo, he may not have as easy a sale of it as before. mr d

hello did consider the time thing. vut as many of htese animals were hunted in the last 50-150 years, might some skin or teeth still be able to yeild dna. since specimens are not thousands of years old. also some museums maintain preserved specimens, mr d

hello believe you stated to having practiced law. how do you feel about say a client of your being forced to give dna samples, on being merely arrested, not charged but only arrested. and would you consider it violation of the right to non incrimination. should there not be enough other evidence present to aquire a court order for dna samples before they can be obtained. under such circumstances if i as a law enforcement official whom wished to obtain a sample i would need merely find some charge and arrest you on. automatically acquiring a sample. yes i understand as currently written it pertains to only certain catagories of offenses. but such laws have a nasty way of expanding. especially under the current climate of fear over terrorism, and a general get tuff on crime attitude amounst most citizens of variuos countries. as an attorney would you advise a client to volunterily give up dna samples? secondly, they say in most cases if not convicted the information will be returned. but what safe guards are there to insure the information is removed from state-federal systems. will you be allowed to check on that status. and in the electronic age where information is shared quickly. how does that apply to information traded between state databases sharing with federal, or even foriegn nations. in you opinion as a law person if say i was accused of a crime in michigan, dna taken and enter in the the state database. the states of florida and texas, plus the country of germany aquire the data. i'm released as innocent and michigan removes my data. under current law are florida and texas also required to remove the data, or do laws vary per state. what are the laws regarding the sharing of such data between countries. thank you mr d

hello some to see about dna, innocent till proven guilty http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060629/ap_on_re_us/dna_accused;_ylt=Akd0MfVgrEyuO25OZdiiBAas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-

hello was wondering if any one has seen as recent news on reanimating dna in dead tissue. no not frankenstein or jurrasic park here. the idea is this. we have cloning basically functional enough to produce viable subjects. such as dolly the sheep. in the world there are many species that are so low in numbers they are having problems with genetic available material with in the species. we also have museums with specimens of these animals. would it be possible to reanimate dna from these specimens, collect egg samples from living species members and clone the specimens. hence increasing the genetic pool. don't quite see the problem many have with the cloning live specimens, since the individuals you are seeking to clone are deseased. strange thoughts mr d

hello responding to your question. i do not disagree to your point of doing both. my point is just that if you stand around screaming why this particular war is only because of economical reasons, you must except actions taken during the conflict were done for that reason. if i may ask, how many people do you know of decry how the gulf war ii is all about oil. yet if someone such as zarqawi is killed, no..no... that's because he's a terrorist and we had to do it to protect ourselves and others from him. and that's true, but it is also justification. we do not wish to admit to ourselves we would do something so base as to murder over money. no...we are bringing freedom, we are protecting the world from radicals. if we need to use such deadly means, it is only for the most noble reasons. well, not all actions are noble, that does not mean they are not needed or justified. it is just that i think people need to except such actions for what they are. and if you are someone decrying we're only over there for oil, then we are killing people for oil, don't try to wrap it up neatly in a glorious idea. mr d ps no i don't think its just about oil. also if you know people who do, then ask the the original benefit question, and see what their reaction is. can they accept death for oil, or do they justify.

hello the reply would be what is it the goverment wants to know and what is it that they consider wrong. do you want them to know who you talk too, or what sites you like to visit. at first they said they were looking for terrorists, and they got some added permission to look at email traffic. then suddenly they were back saying we need to see to website tracking by such web search providers as google and yahoo. why to see what people visit sites that might show signs they are pedophiles. now how could you object to that, unless of course you are one. don't you want our children to be safe? (and yes we do). so give us the data, we will ignore anything else we might find. we don't care about what politcal sites you visit, or keep a log on know what types of books you purchase to read. if your not doing anything wrong, why would you object to our looking? they have even approached companies such as walmart and amazon to help develope better tracking technology and statistical prediction software. (must admit somewhat more nerve wracking that walmart and amazon have better technology the the u.s. goverment). that way by correlating the data they might predict trouble before it occurs. remember, the goverment you have today may not be the goverment you have tomorrow. also many countries are pushing harder for dna databases. everyone gets sampled, why would you object. think how much easier it would be to apprehend criminals, do you want them to get away. or are you engaged in some type of criminal activities, is that why your affraid to give us a sample. and to help us out in our identifying of people would you mind sewing this yellow star to your clothing. if your still apprehensive think of the medical benefits we may enjoy by collecting this data, charting of people over time would make it easier to develope profiles of people and their health risks based on their genes. http://hnn.us/articles/1551.html trust us. there just a little loss of freedom for so much more safety. mr d

hello i believe it was the elderly american statesman franklin who once said ' a man who gives up a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security, deserves neither the freedom or the security'. so i was wondering how do you feel about goverments pressing more and more to take back civil freedoms, under the guise of providing greater security. terrorist make phone calls so we must monitors your calls, inspect your email. only information pertaining to the war on terrorism will be kept of course. to site mates over in england-london, how do you feel about all the surveilence monitoring equipment now watching you. facial recognition software being run on your majestic profiles while out and about. are goverments helping to create a climate of fear so that you will willing hand over your liberties just to feel safe. strange thoughts mr d

hello interesting ideas about cigars there. does anyone know the price of a hand rolled havana now adays? the question is phrased as it is because i find it interesting how so many people call the gulf war ii america's war for oil. how our (western countries) way of life is threaten, which basically comes down to our economic way of life as it is currently driven by oil for heating, transportation and industry. if you accept that as the true cause for this war occurring then one reason for targeting certain individuals to be killed (no more pleasant terms like neutralize) is because they interfer with our maintaining our economic costs of doing business. we kill them so that we may continue driving large suv's, buying our plastic bottles of water, and the low cost of oil leading to the low cost of refined oil based products into such things as the plastics used in the monitor cases and keyboards as i am currently typing at. yet to suggest to people we kill to save ourselves a few dollars\euros, and suddenly many who profess it is an oil war begin talking about terrorism and our need to protect people as the cause for the war. mr d