From: William Clark on 31 Jan 2010 12:19 In article <25128116-f286-48cb-af66-6c4940eda4be(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > On Jan 30, 5:16�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > In article <gj69m5hj5cm58a7rtc5ap1qtqglnhpd...(a)4ax.com>, > > �Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 10:36:10 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > > > <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > >Africans are very genetically diverse. There is more genetic variation > > > >amongst Africans than all other humans combined, by a lot. > > > > > It's interesting that East Africa produces world class long distance > > > runners, and West Africa produces world class sprinters. � Even when > > > those people have lived in American countries for generations. > > > > > I wonder what characteristics would be best for golfing. > > > > I think you will find that it is because it is East Africa that is more > > mountainous (at least where people live) so running at altitude trains > > those slow twitch muscles and aerobic capacity. I don't think it has as > > much to do with genetics, as it does with tradition. > > No such thing as natural selection in Africa I suppose. This thing > with sickle cell disease and malaria, just a spurious correlation. And this has what to do with athletic performance? I see, absolutely nothing :-)
From: assimilate on 31 Jan 2010 12:19 On 30-Jan-2010, "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > > Besides, all foreign countries are full of "ethnic" people. Which ones > > are you saying pull down the US numbers? Can't be Italians - they live > > longer, and so to Hispanics in Spain. I get it - must be those pesky > > African-Americans, Tut, tut. > > I am talking about statistics and facts. I crunched a few numbers. You > are > talking about racism. What kind of scientist does that? It can make him feel better about himself compared to the rest of us knuckledragging racist americans! :-> -- bill-o
From: kenpitts on 31 Jan 2010 12:31 On Jan 20, 9:45 pm, "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com> wrote: > On 2010-01-20 22:03:52 -0500, Moderate said: > > > > > > > "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com> wrote in message > >news:2010012021512816807-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom... > >> On 2010-01-20 14:14:29 -0500, dene said: > > >>> "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >>>news:4b56f5a5$0$4969$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 01:00:19 -0800, dene wrote: > >>>>> "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com> wrote in message > >>>>>news:2010012001542916807-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom... > > >>>>>> Dene, the majority of voting Americans voted for Obama's agenda a > >>>>>> year ago. Their disapproval now is not over how far-reaching his > >>>>>> agenda has been. They voted for it. They voted for SWEEPING CHANGE. > >>>>>> Their disapproval is over how little the Dems have been able to get > >>>>>> done with the obstructionist right standing in their way at every > >>>>>> step, and how watered-down the health care bill has become. > > >>>>> So you are among the small number of loons who do not think Obama is > >>>>> left enough. No surprise. He's surrounded himself with your types > >>>>> and they are completely out of touch with the pulse of America. > > >>>>> Yes....America voted for change, but not change that involves big > >>>>> government, higher taxes, bailouts, and deficits. America is voting > >>>>> for change once again and this time, it will be liberal Dems who get > >>>>> the boot, starting with Reid. > > >>>> I think Randy is right about this. People did vote for sweeping change, > >>>> especially for things like genuine healthcare reform. But the reality of > >>>> Washington is that you cannot get something without giving something > >>>> else away, and inevitably legislation becomes clogged with pork and > >>>> give-aways to special interests. The current healthcare reform bill has > >>>> been watered down to the extent that nobody likes it. > > >>>> The issue is not Obama. The issue is systemic corruption and a > >>>> government more beholden to special interest groups than it is to > >>>> voters. > > >>> It's also too much, too quick. Reasonable steps can be taken >> systematically > >>> to reform insurance, thereby dropping premiums. It's the one thing the > >>> government can do...even the playing field all at once. For example, no > >>> pre-ex underwriting. > > >>> I think Obama knew in advance about the back room deals to get the Senate > >>> votes. It's how they play the game in Chicago. > > >>> -Greg > > >> It 's also how legislation gets done in Washington. Always has been.. > > >> Randy > > > Then what was 'hope and change?' > > It's what the majority voted for. > > The fact that the Grand Obstructionist Party has managed to stop the > change agenda in its tracks is a poor testimony on the ability of > Congressional Dems. Says very little about Obama. > > Randy- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - How do you explain Republican victories in Virginia, New Jersey and Mass? Ken
From: William Clark on 31 Jan 2010 12:33 In article <7skin0FknlU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message > news:97da47aa-64be-4ce2-a30b-5e4a3914a0bb(a)r6g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > On Jan 29, 2:56 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > > > > > I suppose it has something to do with the ethic percentages of the two > > countries. Life expectancies of different ethnic groups vary. The United > > States has a higher percentage of ethnic people whose average life > > expectancy is lower. > > > > It is more likely genetics than irony. > > More diversity than anything else. There are structural social > problems in the US though, like the nature of inner cities, urban > nightmares, created by progressives, FWIW. Places like say France or > say Sweden, or Germany, heavily discriminate against non French, > Swedes, Germans, and one wonders if they include say Turks living in > Germany in their data. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > That's what came to my mind. It wasn't race in as much as it was lifestyle. > Married men live longer than single men. Black men have a tendancy to be > single vs Hispanic men. Calculate the life expectancy of the American > Indians, particularily among the men where alcoholism is a pervasive > problem. Throwing these factors into the mix, it could account to why > America's life expectancy is lower than other countries. We have the right > to be homeless, addicts without any assurance that society will rescue from > you from it. Whereas, other countries coddle and tax their citizens more. And keep them alive longer.
From: William Clark on 31 Jan 2010 12:34
In article <dbfcebd6-6b09-4080-b511-bd7b8bade0e5(a)r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > On Jan 30, 5:23�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > In article <MPG.25ce10a1523c71fb989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > > > > > �BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > In article <clark-B79122.09584229012...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > > > > In article <MPG.25ccb4457acbf6f3989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > �BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In article <bd2a7183-1bb3-45af-9786-e1c1ac0cb5c2 > > > > > @b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, frostback2...(a)att.net says... > > > > > > > > The most interesting aspect of this is your great concern. IF you > > > > > > take > > > > > > the position that I have never published anything in the area of > > > > > > materials science, you become, as a point of fact, a liar. It is > > > > > > not > > > > > > just a matter of being misinformed, because my CV was published > > > > > > online > > > > > > and available for many years, for anyone to see. > > > > > > > > What is more relevant is that your concern suggests that you are > > > > > > unpublished, or publish little in the area, isn't it, and it > > > > > > bothers > > > > > > you because you think there is some sort of academic status > > > > > > associated > > > > > > with who employs you in this business, when in fact academic status > > > > > > is > > > > > > solely a function of your accomplishments. > > > > > > > > Now as I claim zero status as a materials scientist, and I claim > > > > > > none, > > > > > > it becomes a problem for you that I have published in the area, > > > > > > because you want to claim some sort of status here, when you, like > > > > > > I, > > > > > > have none! > > > > > > > > In any event, the $5K bet is still open. > > > > > > > I have a $1US that says Billy doesn't take your bet. > > > > > > Damn right I am not. This is not an issue for "bets", this is about the > > > > core of academic integrity. He is claiming to have attended meetings > > > > and > > > > published in a field where it is absolutely clear he has not. George > > > > O'Leary lost his job for doing exactly the same thing, but I am sure > > > > your wingnut double standards can find a way around that. > > > > > If you are so cocksure you are right why not take the bet. You get $5K > > > and you get to nail a college prof to the wall. "Dr." Phil Jones of > > > UEA's CRU nailed himself without a bet. > > > > I have provided him with the evidence for free. I am not not taking his > > money. > > Make the bet then and don;t take my money if you win. Claiming you > won't take my money by not taking the bet is evidence of cowardice. Fine - you have no publications in materials science. That much is now clear. You should be ashamed of yourself. |