Hey,
I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
You do not exactly sound like my clone, but there are alot of
qualities in your post that remind me of myself.
It is my experience that genius, though a common feature in many young
scientists toady, is not always a constant thing. Please try not to
laugh at what I am about to say.
The expression "a stroke of genius" had to start somewhere. Every
person has their up and down periods intellectually. I may be younger
than you, but maybe you could take my advice; always explore and
pursue what you are interested in. The right stimulation will bring
out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
that far off.) in several ways.
You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
Unfortunately, I have to go.

Ender wrote:

  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> that far off.) in several ways.
> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> Unfortunately, I have to go.

Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and 
ninety-eight percent persperation.

Bob Kolker

In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:

>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.

Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I mean,
is there really a reputable group of psychologists around which still
puts any faith in these quaint measures of some absolute sort of
"intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred of professionalism
by sharing this number with impressionable children who think it
says something important about them?)

OP: I am far, far removed from being 14. I can assure you that when
I am working with students in their teens and 20s, I never ask about
"IQ", and if told about it would (at best) snigger inwardly and
say, "that's nice". It is much, much more interesting to me to hear
about your science-fair project, your volunteer activities, and of
course what you've learned in school (NOT your grades). Put the label 
aside and use the talents you think you have to do something 
interesting and useful.

dave

In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
 ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:

> ....
> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> The right stimulation will bring
> out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....


      Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.  
Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.  
It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you 
study.  Good luck!

            Ken Pledger.

"Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ender wrote:
>
>  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
>> that far off.) in several ways.
>> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
>> Unfortunately, I have to go.
>
>Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and 
>ninety-eight percent persperation.

That is because Thomas Edison lacked inspiration.

He perspired only from the effort of robbing other workers, such as
Tesla, of their ideas.

-- 
BELANGER

Be seeing you.

Dave Rusin wrote:
> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> 
>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> 
> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
> children who think it says something important about them?)

Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
they were given in the school class room, and the results
publicized to the individual at least.  This gave the teachers an
idea of what to expect, and worked reasonably well with the
homogenous groups involved.  The whole process became highly
non-PC in the following years, and was largely limited to
do-it-yourself quiz books.

They don't measure the laziness of the subject.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!

In article <40922485.B295B3AF@yahoo.com>,
   CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Dave Rusin wrote:
>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>> 
>> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>> children who think it says something important about them?)
>
>Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>they were given in the school class room, and the results
>publicized to the individual at least.

Nope.  The kid didn't get to know.

<snip>

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>
>> > ....
>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>> > The right stimulation will bring
>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>
>>
>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>> study.  Good luck!
>
>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental 
network
>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong love
>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
>
>If at all possible, do what you love.

Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>
> > ....
> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> > The right stimulation will bring
> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>
>
>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
> study.  Good luck!

Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental network
protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong love
of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.

If at all possible, do what you love.

Slainte,
Fletch

In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
   glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > ....
>>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>>> > The right stimulation will bring
>>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
>>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>>> study.  Good luck!
>>>
>>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental 
>>network
>>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
>>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong 
love
>>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
>>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
>>>
>>>If at all possible, do what you love.
>>
>>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>
>Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his 
>love for them.

Then he has some growing up to do.  We ate pets if they were food.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

"Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
> Hey,
> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> You do not exactly sound like my clone, but there are alot of
> qualities in your post that remind me of myself.
> It is my experience that genius, though a common feature in many young
> scientists toady, is not always a constant thing. Please try not to
> laugh at what I am about to say.
> The expression "a stroke of genius" had to start somewhere. Every
> person has their up and down periods intellectually. I may be younger
> than you, but maybe you could take my advice; always explore and
> pursue what you are interested in. The right stimulation will bring
> out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> that far off.) in several ways.
> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> Unfortunately, I have to go.

Remember to flush.

"Belanger" <ready_fightTAKEOUT@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d2p390hc2itejvdak4ble9jrhi1tdrvtjq@4ax.com...
> "Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Ender wrote:
> >
> >  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> >> that far off.) in several ways.
> >> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> >> Unfortunately, I have to go.
> >
> >Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and
> >ninety-eight percent persperation.
>
> That is because Thomas Edison lacked inspiration.
>
> He perspired only from the effort of robbing other workers, such as
> Tesla, of their ideas.

*yawn*  Welcome to sci.physics.... idiot.

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4092468d$0$28934$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> In article <40922485.B295B3AF@yahoo.com>,
>    CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Dave Rusin wrote:
> >> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> >>
> >> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
> >> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
> >> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
> >> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
> >> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
> >> children who think it says something important about them?)
> >
> >Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
> >they were given in the school class room, and the results
> >publicized to the individual at least.
>
> Nope.  The kid didn't get to know.

Unless the parents told them.  However, once you turn 18 you can obtain the
information.  Out of curiosity I had a look at my school records from 1st
grade (only grade of school I made it through).  Other than the fact I was a
shit toward my teachers, the only interesting thing was the IQ tests, and
the results due to the political climate at the time.  The resulting grade
skipping, and subsequent torture by kids several years my senior probably
left scars.  However, the trauma of the rest of my youth made up for it.  If
your tooth hurts... smash your toe with a hammer and the toothache will go
away.

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Dave Rusin wrote:
>>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>>>
>>> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>>> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>>> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>>> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>>> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>>> children who think it says something important about them?)
>>
>> Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>> they were given in the school class room, and the results
>> publicized to the individual at least.
> 
> Nope.  The kid didn't get to know.

Maybe you didn't.  I did.  My friends did.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!

In article <FCjkc.1219$kh4.117602@attbi_s52>,
Robert J. Kolker <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Ender wrote:
>
>  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
>> that far off.) in several ways.
>> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
>> Unfortunately, I have to go.
>
>Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and 
>ninety-eight percent persperation.
>
>Bob Kolker
>


Well, there's more to it than that.  There's been times that I've stared 
dumbly at my homework for hours because I Just Didn't Get It.  Sure, I'd 
read the text, find other books to read, scribble on paper, and not make 
any real start.  Sometimes, no matter how hard you work, for some reason 
it just doesn't click.

-- 
"The polhode rolls without slipping on the herpolhode lying in the 
invariable plane." -- Goldstein, Classical Mechanics 2nd. ed., p207.

In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
 <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>
>>> > ....
>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>> > The right stimulation will bring
>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>
>>>
>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>> study.  Good luck!
>>
>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental 
>network
>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong love
>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
>>
>>If at all possible, do what you love.
>
>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.

Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his 
love for them.


-- 
"The result of this experiment was inconclusive, so we had to use 
statistics."  (Overheard at international physics conference)

ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote in message news:<f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>...
> Hey,
> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> You do not exactly sound like my clone, but there are alot of
> qualities in your post that remind me of myself.
> It is my experience that genius, though a common feature in many young
> scientists toady, is not always a constant thing. Please try not to
> laugh at what I am about to say.
> The expression "a stroke of genius" had to start somewhere. Every
> person has their up and down periods intellectually. I may be younger
> than you, but maybe you could take my advice; always explore and
> pursue what you are interested in. The right stimulation will bring
> out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> that far off.) in several ways.
> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> Unfortunately, I have to go.


Why don't you just study IQ tests, take one, and be proud to be
certified the stature your delusions desire.

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:04:49 GMT, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Dave Rusin wrote:
>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>> 
>> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>> children who think it says something important about them?)
>
>Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>they were given in the school class room, and the results
>publicized to the individual at least.

In my case, it was in the form of "You have an IQ of xxx - why are you
goofing off?

>  This gave the teachers an
>idea of what to expect, and worked reasonably well with the
>homogenous groups involved.  The whole process became highly
>non-PC in the following years, and was largely limited to
>do-it-yourself quiz books.
>
>They don't measure the laziness of the subject.

See above :-)

-- 
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net

Michael Varney <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> coughed up the following:

> "Belanger" <ready_fightTAKEOUT@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d2p390hc2itejvdak4ble9jrhi1tdrvtjq@4ax.com...
>> "Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ender wrote:
>>>
>>>  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're
>>> not
>>>> that far off.) in several ways.
>>>> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
>>>> Unfortunately, I have to go.
>>>
>>> Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and
>>> ninety-eight percent persperation.
>>
>> That is because Thomas Edison lacked inspiration.
>>
>> He perspired only from the effort of robbing other workers, such as
>> Tesla, of their ideas.
>
> *yawn*  Welcome to sci.physics.... idiot.

IIRC, TAE stole "Le Voyage dans la lune".  Perhaps that is what he is
irked about.  It bothers me as well.

-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Dave Rusin <rusin@vesuvius.math.niu.edu> coughed up the following:

> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>
>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>
> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I mean,
> is there really a reputable group of psychologists around which still
> puts any faith in these quaint measures of some absolute sort of
> "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred of professionalism
> by sharing this number with impressionable children who think it
> says something important about them?)

I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.

I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
/never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
just begging for one of two things to happen:

1. A false sense of superiority
or
2. A false sense of inferiority

Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.


....[thwack]...



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

"Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<FCjkc.1219$kh4.117602@attbi_s52>...
> Ender wrote:
> 
>   out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> > that far off.) in several ways.
> > You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> > Unfortunately, I have to go.
> 
> Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and 
> ninety-eight percent persperation.
> 
> Bob Kolker

.... which makes genius a summertime thing.

David Ames

"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> >In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> >   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> >>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> >>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > ....
> >>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> >>> > The right stimulation will bring
> >>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
> >>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
> >>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
> >>> study.  Good luck!
> >>
> >>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
> >network
> >>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
> >>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
love
> >>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
> >>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
> >>
> >>If at all possible, do what you love.
> >
> >Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> >of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> >harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> >a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>
> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
> love for them.
>

Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
far from animals or livestock.


Rob

>
> -- 
> "The result of this experiment was inconclusive, so we had to use
> statistics."  (Overheard at international physics conference)

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
>    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > ....
> >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
> >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
> >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
> >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
> >>>> study.  Good luck!
> >>>
> >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
> >>network
> >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find
the
> >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
> love
> >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
skills
> >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
life.
> >>>
> >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
> >>
> >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> >
> >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
> >love for them.
>
> Then he has some growing up to do.

So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up yet.
Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.

> We ate pets if they were food.

And this is useful to anyone how?

Slainte,
Fletch

"Alan Balmer" <albalmer@att.net> wrote in message
news:7ct490hir6p3ia1akm18bomadhl08s0ou1@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:04:49 GMT, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Dave Rusin wrote:
> >> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> >>
> >> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
> >> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
> >> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
> >> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
> >> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
> >> children who think it says something important about them?)
> >
> >Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
> >they were given in the school class room, and the results
> >publicized to the individual at least.
>
> In my case, it was in the form of "You have an IQ of xxx - why are you
> goofing off?
>
> >  This gave the teachers an
> >idea of what to expect, and worked reasonably well with the
> >homogenous groups involved.  The whole process became highly
> >non-PC in the following years, and was largely limited to
> >do-it-yourself quiz books.
> >
> >They don't measure the laziness of the subject.
>
> See above :-)

My son tests at 95th percentile.  Nonetheless, he brings home D's and F's on
his report cardes.

I think he is conducting a social experiment to see how little work is
required to get a passing grade.

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:

> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>
> >I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>
> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I mean,
> is there really a reputable group of psychologists around which still
> puts any faith in these quaint measures of some absolute sort of
> "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred of professionalism
> by sharing this number with impressionable children who think it
> says something important about them?)

When I was in grade 8 we had to decide which highschool we were going to.
Some level of school was for people who had to go to highschool because it
was the law. They'd be flipping burgers at BoogerSling. The next level was
people with mechanical aptitude. They'd become plumbers, carpenters, etc.
The highest level was people who would go on to university.

To help us out they gave us a bunch of tests, including an IQ test.
Looking back, it was a stupid thing to do.

Sadly, there are still some schools that do this sort of thing. If the
board has a 'gifted' program you have to have a certain IQ to get in. My
wife missed by 2 points. Her sister got into the gifted program. A
highschool diploma requires 27 or 32 credits in a 4 year period. My wife
got 40 in a 3 year period, graudated with honours and went on to triple
major at university within four years. Her sister graduated highschool
with 32 credits and dropped out of university in the second year.

On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.

> OP: I am far, far removed from being 14. I can assure you that when
> I am working with students in their teens and 20s, I never ask about
> "IQ", and if told about it would (at best) snigger inwardly and
> say, "that's nice". It is much, much more interesting to me to hear
> about your science-fair project, your volunteer activities, and of
> course what you've learned in school (NOT your grades). Put the label
> aside and use the talents you think you have to do something
> interesting and useful.

Agreed.

-- 
Send e-mail to: darrell at cs dot toronto dot edu
Don't send e-mail to vice.president@whitehouse.gov

In article <brednRqDe_OrFQ_dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>,
Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
>
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>>  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>> >In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>> >   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>> >>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>> >>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>> >>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > ....
>> >>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>> >>> > The right stimulation will bring
>> >>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>> >>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
>> >>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>> >>> study.  Good luck!
>> >>
>> >>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
>> >network
>> >>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
>> >>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
>love
>> >>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
>> >>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
>> >>
>> >>If at all possible, do what you love.
>> >
>> >Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>> >of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>> >harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>> >a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>>
>> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
>> love for them.
>>
>
>Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
>"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
>far from animals or livestock.

When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they 
usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how 
you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.


-- 
"'No user-serviceable parts inside.'  I'll be the judge of that!"

"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <brednRqDe_OrFQ_dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>,
> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> >> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> >>  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> >> >   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> >> >>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> >> >>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >> >>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > ....
> >> >>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> >> >>> > The right stimulation will bring
> >> >>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
times.
> >> >>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
yourself.
> >> >>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
> >> >>> study.  Good luck!
> >> >>
> >> >>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
> >> >network
> >> >>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find
the
> >> >>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
> >love
> >> >>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
skills
> >> >>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
life.
> >> >>
> >> >>If at all possible, do what you love.
> >> >
> >> >Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> >> >of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> >> >harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> >> >a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> >>
> >> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
> >> love for them.
> >>
> >
> >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
> >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
> >far from animals or livestock.
>
> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.

Didn't mean to start a wicked subthread.  Just airing a small regret and
wish of mine.

I was thinking of a small-animal vet.  I am glad that there are people who
make farm animals' lives as pleasant as possible, but this would not be my
niche.

Slainte,
Fletch

Gregory L. Hansen wrote:


> Well, there's more to it than that.  There's been times that I've
> stared
> dumbly at my homework for hours because I Just Didn't Get It.  Sure,
> I'd read the text, find other books to read, scribble on paper, and
> not make
> any real start.  Sometimes, no matter how hard you work, for some
> reason it just doesn't click.

you know that's not necessarily an i.q thing. i tend to be overliteral
and hence do not 'get' something when it is poorly phrased or not
explained in a manner which i can access.
i don't do well on i.q tests either (shut-up at the back there), though
strangly enough give me a 12 minute i.q test (some society does that
on-line, i've forgotten which) and i'm quids in. i have scored in the
upper 5 th and in the lower imbecile range -- it just depends on the
day/my frame of mind/my concentration and whether the questions suit
me.
so what is i.q ? there is (you should know this) still no (as in none at
all) consensus on what intelligence actually is. the honest among us
must then (logically) admit that i.q as tested is nothing more than the
'abilty' you display in peforming a/the test. 
the i.q tests are built upon certain assumptions (that they measure a
certain quantity or quality loosly define as intelligence {despite
their being no actual definition of intelligence, iyswim})
so, just how is your 'actual' 'measured' i.q relevant to what you do and
what you want to do ?
well it isn't really, not at all.
not one little bit.
what counts is what you do, the results you get. you don't get paid for
'being' sigma whatever, you don't pass exams with it either, all that
counts is your hard slog and the results that you produce.
and imo you, with your positive attitude to work, will make it much
further than any 'gifted' but lazy person.
so you ain't going to be a 'rocket' scientist. so what ? it's not like
there's a million jobs for rocket scientists is it ?
just be happy

sammi

"Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> > In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
> >    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> > >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> > >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> > >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> > >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> > >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> > >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> > ....
> > >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> > >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
> > >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
times.
> > >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
yourself.
> > >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
> > >>>> study.  Good luck!
> > >>>
> > >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
> > >>network
> > >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find
> the
> > >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
> > love
> > >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
> skills
> > >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
> life.
> > >>>
> > >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
> > >>
> > >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> > >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> > >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> > >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> > >
> > >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
> > >love for them.
> >
> > Then he has some growing up to do.
>
> So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up yet.
> Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
>
> > We ate pets if they were food.
>
> And this is useful to anyone how?

Ask the Chinese.  *woof*

Richard Henry wrote:


> My son tests at 95th percentile.  Nonetheless, he brings home D's and
> F's on his report cardes.
> 
> I think he is conducting a social experiment to see how little work is
> required to get a passing grade.

he will be probably pleasently suprised :)
(the unpleasentness comes with adulthood, when it no longer works.
unfortunately :))

sammi

"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message
news:JZxkc.74$dR2.41837@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> > > In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
> > >    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> > > >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> > > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> > > >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> > > >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> > > >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> > > >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> > ....
> > > >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> > > >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
> > > >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> times.
> > > >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> yourself.
> > > >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what
you
> > > >>>> study.  Good luck!
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with
experimental
> > > >>network
> > > >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do
find
> > the
> > > >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.
(Strong
> > > love
> > > >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
> > skills
> > > >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
> > life.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
> > > >>
> > > >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> > > >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> > > >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> > > >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> > > >
> > > >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of
his
> > > >love for them.
> > >
> > > Then he has some growing up to do.
> >
> > So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up
yet.
> > Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
> >
> > > We ate pets if they were food.
> >
> > And this is useful to anyone how?
>
> Ask the Chinese.  *woof*

Such is the world.  I can only protect mine.  If you want to eat my pets,
you better bring a gun and get me first.  Otherwise, I'll get you.  Of
course, if you are out looking for pets to eat, chances are you have bigger
problems.

Slainte,
Fletch

On 4/30/04 9:15 AM, in article 40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com,
"jmfbahciv@aol.com" <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:

> In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
>  glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>>> In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>>>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> "Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>>> news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> ....
>>>>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>>>>> The right stimulation will bring
>>>>>> out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>>>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about yourself.
>>>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>>>> study.  Good luck!
>>>> 
>>>> Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
>>> network
>>>> protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find the
>>>> work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
> love
>>>> of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my skills
>>>> with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in life.
>>>> 
>>>> If at all possible, do what you love.
>>> 
>>> Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>>> of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>>> harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>>> a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>> 
>> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
>> love for them.
> 
> Then he has some growing up to do.  We ate pets if they were food.
> 

And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them? And I don't
mean you love for them with a bit of ketchup.

Nope, probably not.

P

"Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
> Hey,
> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
<snip>

Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is what
you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average intelligence,
learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther along
than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.

When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good grades
and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those are
immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your grades
were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you can
do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need to
learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you
know, the more you know that you don't know.

-karen

"Gregory L. Hansen" <
>snip<

> >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
> >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
> >far from animals or livestock.
>
> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.

Now I understand the basis for your mistake.  Why do you think the above?
Thousands and thousands of vets work in the arena of ranching/livestock.
Out of love.

> I don't know how
> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.

If you ever knew an old country vet, youde know they treat livestock better
than modern physicians treat their patients.  A friend of mine is a vet.
She even performed surgery on a wonderful old dog of mine.  If it had been a
horse would she have cared for him any less?


Rob

"Thomas G. Marshall"

>  He will
> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> just begging for one of two things to happen:
>
> 1. A false sense of superiority
> or
> 2. A false sense of inferiority
>
> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.


He will soon learn one of the two within the first few weeks of school.
Rarely do people think they are "the same".  Heres to luck though... >clink<
And congrats on being a dad.  You will love it.  When he's sleeping that is.
;^)


Rob

"Bill Vajk" <bill9north@hotmailDITCHTHIS.com> wrote in message
news:v_mdnaW-VoFNRg_d4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> karen wrote:
>
> > "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
> > news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>
> >>Hey,
> >>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is
what
> > you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average
intelligence,
> > learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther
along
> > than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
> > continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
>
> > When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good
grades
> > and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those
are
> > immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your
grades
> > were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you
can
> > do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need
to
> > learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
> > knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more
you
> > know, the more you know that you don't know.
>
> Nicely stated.
>
> Don't forget the value of happiness which, IMO,
> trumps all else.
>
>
>

Ok.  Wisdom is _A_ goal.

karen wrote:

> "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
> news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...

>>Hey,
>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.

> <snip>

> Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is what
> you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average intelligence,
> learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther along
> than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
> continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.

> When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good grades
> and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those are
> immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your grades
> were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you can
> do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need to
> learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
> knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you
> know, the more you know that you don't know.

Nicely stated.

Don't forget the value of happiness which, IMO,
trumps all else.

"Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dCykc.44989$2v.1096@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> "Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message
> news:JZxkc.74$dR2.41837@news.uswest.net...
> >
> > "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> > > > In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
> > > >    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> > > > >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> > > > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> > > > >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> > > > >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> > > > >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> > > > >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> > ....
> > > > >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> > > > >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
> > > > >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway?
.....
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> > times.
> > > > >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> > yourself.
> > > > >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what
> you
> > > > >>>> study.  Good luck!
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with
> experimental
> > > > >>network
> > > > >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do
> find
> > > the
> > > > >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.
> (Strong
> > > > love
> > > > >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
> > > skills
> > > > >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier
in
> > > life.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> > > > >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> > > > >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> > > > >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> > > > >
> > > > >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of
> his
> > > > >love for them.
> > > >
> > > > Then he has some growing up to do.
> > >
> > > So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up
> yet.
> > > Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
> > >
> > > > We ate pets if they were food.
> > >
> > > And this is useful to anyone how?
> >
> > Ask the Chinese.  *woof*
>
> Such is the world.  I can only protect mine.  If you want to eat my pets,
> you better bring a gun and get me first.  Otherwise, I'll get you.  Of
> course, if you are out looking for pets to eat, chances are you have
bigger
> problems.

Having a bit of trouble parsing my comment I see.

In article <OumdnY25TtJwSg_dRVn-tA@gbronline.com>,
Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
>
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <
>>snip<
>
>> >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
>> >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
>> >far from animals or livestock.
>>
>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.
>
>Now I understand the basis for your mistake.  Why do you think the above?

Because of the people I've talked to that said they love animals or they 
wanted to be a vet.  Because any random speaker on Usenet is more likely a 
city boy than a farm boy.

>Thousands and thousands of vets work in the arena of ranching/livestock.
>Out of love.

Out of love of the animals, or love of working with the animals?

>
>> I don't know how
>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>
>If you ever knew an old country vet, youde know they treat livestock better
>than modern physicians treat their patients.  A friend of mine is a vet.
>She even performed surgery on a wonderful old dog of mine.  If it had been a
>horse would she have cared for him any less?

Or a steer two months away from slaughter?  Or a fryer chicken?  Work on 
food animals (those that are to be harvested) is an economic activity.  
Some problems, like an outbreak of hoof and mouth, are even treated by 
slaughtering the animals en masse.  

Didn't really seem consistent with "deep love of".  I saw images of "Oh, 
you like cats?  I know a place that skins them and sells the hides, you 
might like working there."

-- 
"A nice adaptation of conditions will make almost any hypothesis agree
with the phenomena.  This will please the imagination but does not advance
our knowledge." -- J. Black, 1803.

"karen" <nothing@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<etAkc.2019$Wc4.7710@bcandid.telisphere.com>...
> "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
> news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
> > Hey,
> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> <snip>
> 
> Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is what
> you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average intelligence,
> learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther along
> than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
> continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
> 
> When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good grades
> and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those are
> immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your grades
> were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you can
> do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need to
> learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
> knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you
> know, the more you know that you don't know.
> 
> -karen
Wow, I posted in hopes of helping somebody in a feindishly lazy way,
and in the end I got help myself. How about that. I read all of the
posts and except for the little tangent about farm animals and such,
it was all really good advice. Props to usenet.

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:
> "Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> 
>>In article <brednRqDe_OrFQ_dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>,
>>Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>>>news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>>>
>>>>In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>>>> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>>>>>  "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>>>>> ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>....
>>>>>>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>>>>>>>The right stimulation will bring
>>>>>>>>out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> 
> times.
> 
>>>>>>>Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> 
> yourself.
> 
>>>>>>>It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>>>>>>study.  Good luck!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
>>>>>
>>>>>network
>>>>>
>>>>>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find
> 
> the
> 
>>>>>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
>>>
>>>love
>>>
>>>>>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
> 
> skills
> 
>>>>>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
> 
> life.
> 
>>>>>>If at all possible, do what you love.
>>>>>
>>>>>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>>>>>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>>>>>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>>>>>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>>>>
>>>>Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
>>>>love for them.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
>>>"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
>>>far from animals or livestock.
>>
>>When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>>usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
>>you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
> 
> 
> Didn't mean to start a wicked subthread.  Just airing a small regret and
> wish of mine.
> 
> I was thinking of a small-animal vet.  I am glad that there are people who
> make farm animals' lives as pleasant as possible, but this would not be my
> niche.

Hmm.  Well, you might google for "temple+grandin" to see what can be
done in that niche.

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall"
>
>>  He will
>> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
>> just begging for one of two things to happen:
>>
>> 1. A false sense of superiority
>> or
>> 2. A false sense of inferiority
>>
>> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>
>
> He will soon learn one of the two within the first few weeks of
> school. Rarely do people think they are "the same".


He will always have opportunities for self doubt, or to think that he's
superior or inferior.

What I don't want are such feeling to be based upon hoo-haa.  That would
be a /false/ sense of either.


> Heres to luck
> though... >clink< And congrats on being a dad.  You will love it.
> When he's sleeping that is. ;^)

Just great----now total strangers are trying to scare me to death :)

Thanks!


>
>
> Rob

-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
 
> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they 
> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how 
> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.

Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
"animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.

Except in a city, the vast majority of vets focus their attention on
the health of farm livestock like steers, dairy herds, swine, poultry,
and sometimes even horses. The vet's function is to keep these animals
healthy and productive until they age to the point of going to market.

Of course they love animals, and working with animals to maintain the
animal's health. The fact that the animal was produced for the sole
purposes of producing a food product or going to market isn't an
issue.

I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not
keep livestock for pets, and don't ever confuse their pets (dogs,
cats, etc.) with their livestock. Neither do vets.

                                                      Harry C.

"Thomas G. Marshall" <

> > Heres to luck
> > though... >clink< And congrats on being a dad.  You will love it.
> > When he's sleeping that is. ;^)
>
> Just great----now total strangers are trying to scare me to death :)
>
> Thanks!

I had a friend who was convinced that he was going to be the worst father
possible.  I felt the same way.  Turns out he couldnt be a better parent.
Its all about love and respect.  Thats all.  He wouldnt trade being a dad
for all the tea in China.


Rob

"Rob Duncan" <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote in message news:<OumdnY25TtJwSg_dRVn-tA@gbronline.com>...
> "Gregory L. Hansen" <
> >snip<
>  
> > >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
> > >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew up
> > >far from animals or livestock.
> >
> > When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
> > usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.
> 
> Now I understand the basis for your mistake.  Why do you think the above?
> Thousands and thousands of vets work in the arena of ranching/livestock.
> Out of love.
> 
> > I don't know how
> > you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
> 
> If you ever knew an old country vet, youde know they treat livestock better
> than modern physicians treat their patients.  A friend of mine is a vet.
> She even performed surgery on a wonderful old dog of mine.  If it had been a
> horse would she have cared for him any less?
> 

Agree. I've seen this many times, particularly with 'Old School' farm
vets who usually own an old shaggy dog or cat themselves.

This, in the face of the fact that the farm vet is also responsible
for caring for large herds of livestock that may be worth hundreds of
thousands or even millions of dollars. Most will care for an old,
beloved, dog or cat with equal dedication and attention.

No disrespect to city folks, but most don't comprehend the clear
distinction that exists between domestic pets and livestock in a rural
community, perhaps because they've had no experience with livestock.

                                               Harry C.

Michael Varney wrote:

> "Belanger" <ready_fightTAKEOUT@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d2p390hc2itejvdak4ble9jrhi1tdrvtjq@4ax.com...
> > "Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Ender wrote:
> > >
> > >  out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? You're not
> > >> that far off.) in several ways.
> > >> You said you ain't that smart. Intellect is 95% attitidue.
> > >> Unfortunately, I have to go.
> > >
> > >Thomas Edison said that genius is two percent inspiration and
> > >ninety-eight percent persperation.
> >
> > That is because Thomas Edison lacked inspiration.
> >
> > He perspired only from the effort of robbing other workers, such as
> > Tesla, of their ideas.
>
> *yawn*  Welcome to sci.physics.... idiot.

Dale Trynor wrote:
Actually I also read or heard that Thomas Edison did steal a lot of his ideas
and also had an army of lawyers for this very reason.
Dale

Michael Varney wrote:

> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:4092468d$0$28934$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> > In article <40922485.B295B3AF@yahoo.com>,
> >    CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >Dave Rusin wrote:
> > >> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> > >>
> > >> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
> > >> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
> > >> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
> > >> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
> > >> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
> > >> children who think it says something important about them?)
> > >
> > >Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
> > >they were given in the school class room, and the results
> > >publicized to the individual at least.
> >
> > Nope.  The kid didn't get to know.
>
> Unless the parents told them.  However, once you turn 18 you can obtain the
> information.  Out of curiosity I had a look at my school records from 1st
> grade (only grade of school I made it through).  Other than the fact I was a
> shit toward my teachers, the only interesting thing was the IQ tests, and
> the results due to the political climate at the time.  The resulting grade
> skipping, and subsequent torture by kids several years my senior probably
> left scars.  However, the trauma of the rest of my youth made up for it.  If
> your tooth hurts... smash your toe with a hammer and the toothache will go
> away.

Dale Trynor wrote:
I have a number of reasons to hate public school systems and you seam to have
given me more reason to feel this way.
Dale

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> just begging for one of two things to happen:
> 
> 1. A false sense of superiority
> or
> 2. A false sense of inferiority
> 
> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
> 

Just in case, exaggerate and tell him he's 180+.

If I had to choose, I'd pick 1.
Why would a false sense of superiority be such a bad thing?

A 1-kid will initiate things, because he has the ego to think he's capable.
He might fail, but law of averages states he'll succeed at some point
which will only fuel his superiority complex.  A 2-kid would sulk in the 
corner with inactivity.

So what if the 1-kid is a know-it-all and makes his peers feel like a
worthelss piece of 2-kid?  At the end of life, no one is keeping score, and 
you might  aswell wish the kid a very stable happiness that comes from 
thinking he's a superior human being all the time, provided he doesn't turn 
into Hitler.

But, what are the chances of that?  I'd say small, since I'm constantly
reminded of my 2-ness from my dweeby Ivy/MIT 1-friends, and they haven't
turned into Hitlers nor are their ambitions that "lofty."

In article <dCykc.44989$2v.1096@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>,
   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message
>news:JZxkc.74$dR2.41837@news.uswest.net...
>>
>> "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
>> > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
>> > news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
>> > > In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
>> > >    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>> > > >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>> > > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>> > > >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>> > > >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>> > > >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>> > > >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>> > > >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> > ....
>> > > >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>> > > >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
>> > > >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? 
....
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
>> times.
>> > > >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
>> yourself.
>> > > >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what
>you
>> > > >>>> study.  Good luck!
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with
>experimental
>> > > >>network
>> > > >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do
>find
>> > the
>> > > >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.
>(Strong
>> > > love
>> > > >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
>> > skills
>> > > >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier 
in
>> > life.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>> > > >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>> > > >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>> > > >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>> > > >
>> > > >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of
>his
>> > > >love for them.
>> > >
>> > > Then he has some growing up to do.
>> >
>> > So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up
>yet.
>> > Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
>> >
>> > > We ate pets if they were food.
>> >
>> > And this is useful to anyone how?
>>
>> Ask the Chinese.  *woof*
>
>Such is the world.  I can only protect mine.  If you want to eat my pets,
>you better bring a gun and get me first.  Otherwise, I'll get you.  Of
>course, if you are out looking for pets to eat, chances are you have 
bigger
>problems.

sigh!  You don't get it.  Do you think that farmers don't make
pets out of the animals they care for?  Some don't but most
do.  If they didn't have mother-hen emotions towards their
livestock, the animals wouldn't thrive.

Why do you change your kid's diapers?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
   Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 4/30/04 9:15 AM, in article 40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com,
>"jmfbahciv@aol.com" <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
>>  glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>>> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>>> <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>>>>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ....
>>>>>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>>>>>> The right stimulation will bring
>>>>>>> out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several times.
>>>>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about 
yourself.
>>>>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>>>>> study.  Good luck!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
>>>> network
>>>>> protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find 
the
>>>>> work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
>> love
>>>>> of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my 
skills
>>>>> with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in 
life.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If at all possible, do what you love.
>>>> 
>>>> Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>>>> of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>>>> harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>>>> a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>>> 
>>> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
>>> love for them.
>> 
>> Then he has some growing up to do.  We ate pets if they were food.
>> 
>
>And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?

Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.

My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.



> And I don't
>mean you love for them with a bit of ketchup.
>
>Nope, probably not.

Everybody needs to spend 2 years of their childhood working
on a farm rearing an animal, then eating it.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <7ct490hir6p3ia1akm18bomadhl08s0ou1@4ax.com>,
   Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:04:49 GMT, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Dave Rusin wrote:
>>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>>> 
>>> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>>> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>>> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>>> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>>> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>>> children who think it says something important about them?)
>>
>>Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>>they were given in the school class room, and the results
>>publicized to the individual at least.
>
>In my case, it was in the form of "You have an IQ of xxx - why are you
>goofing off?

<grin>  It's too bad you were kid.  Otherwise you could have said,
"Because I'm fucking bored!".
<snip>

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <fKwkc.34978$eK3.8753@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>news:c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>> In article <brednRqDe_OrFQ_dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>,
>> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>> >news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>> >> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>> >>  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> >In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>> >> >   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>> >> >>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>> >> >>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>> >> >>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > ....
>> >> >>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>> >> >>> > The right stimulation will bring
>> >> >>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
>times.
>> >> >>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
>yourself.
>> >> >>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what 
you
>> >> >>> study.  Good luck!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with 
experimental
>> >> >network
>> >> >>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do 
find
>the
>> >> >>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  
(Strong
>> >love
>> >> >>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
>skills
>> >> >>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
>life.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>If at all possible, do what you love.
>> >> >
>> >> >Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>> >> >of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>> >> >harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>> >> >a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>> >>
>> >> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of 
his
>> >> love for them.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
>> >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew 
up
>> >far from animals or livestock.
>>
>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>
>Didn't mean to start a wicked subthread.

<grin>  But that's the nature of newsgroups.

> ..  Just airing a small regret and
>wish of mine.

Well, there are a dearth of vets around.  If you can, visit
Michigan State U.  or Tufts and see what they're doing w.r.t
husbandry.

>
>I was thinking of a small-animal vet. 

I rarely think of vets who only treat cats and dogs.

> .. I am glad that there are people who
>make farm animals' lives as pleasant as possible,
> but this would not be my niche.

But that's the niche that needs computing expertise.

I just heard a news item about a study that "proved" chickens
thrived better if they were free-range than if they were
grown in a 1'x1'x1' (or whatever the dimensions are) cage. DUH!
Any farmer's wife knows that.

My folks had been ordering 100 chicks to grow for their food.
They had a 99% survival rate.  The norm was 50%.  The difference
was the care given where care means keeping them fed, clean, 
watered, warm, and not being eaten by fellow chicks.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <v_mdnaW-VoFNRg_d4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
   Bill Vajk <bill9north@hotmailDITCHTHIS.com> wrote:
>karen wrote:
>
>> "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
>> news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>
>>>Hey,
>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>
>> <snip>
>
>> Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is 
what
>> you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average 
intelligence,
>> learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther 
along
>> than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
>> continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
>
>> When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good 
grades
>> and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those 
are
>> immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your 
grades
>> were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you 
can
>> do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need 
to
>> learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
>> knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more 
you
>> know, the more you know that you don't know.
>
>Nicely stated.
>
>Don't forget the value of happiness which, IMO,
>trumps all else.

Happiness can be a goal, too.  The key is that happiness
nor any on Karen's list can be given to you by somebody else.
They are also not a right to be guaranteed by society.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <7ce4e226.0404302022.25a9c2cc@posting.google.com>,
Harry Conover <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote:
>glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
>news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
> 
>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they 
>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how 
>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>
>Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
>likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
>"animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.

How in the world did this become an expression of my personal opinions of
what vets do or what care a farm animal needs?  The man expressed a
wistful dream of becoming a veterinarian, because of his deep love of
animals.  I didn't think a job involving the harvesting of animals was 
consistent with that wistful dream.  

>
>I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
>with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not

Or maybe I thought Fletch had pets, and not livestock, in mind.  

-- 
"Is that plutonium on your gums?"
"Shut up and kiss me!"
  -- Marge and Homer Simpson

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:40938e80$0$3031$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> In article <dCykc.44989$2v.1096@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>,
>    "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message
> >news:JZxkc.74$dR2.41837@news.uswest.net...
> >>
> >> "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> >> > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> >> > > In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
> >> > >    glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> >> > > >In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> >> > > > <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> >> > > >>   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> >> > > >>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> >> > > >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >> > > >>>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>> > ....
> >> > > >>>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> >> > > >>>> > The right stimulation will bring
> >> > > >>>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway?
> ...
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> >> times.
> >> > > >>>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> >> yourself.
> >> > > >>>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy
what
> >you
> >> > > >>>> study.  Good luck!
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with
> >experimental
> >> > > >>network
> >> > > >>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do
> >find
> >> > the
> >> > > >>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.
> >(Strong
> >> > > love
> >> > > >>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge
my
> >> > skills
> >> > > >>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier
> in
> >> > life.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>If at all possible, do what you love.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> >> > > >>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> >> > > >>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> >> > > >>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of
> >his
> >> > > >love for them.
> >> > >
> >> > > Then he has some growing up to do.
> >> >
> >> > So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up
> >yet.
> >> > Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
> >> >
> >> > > We ate pets if they were food.
> >> >
> >> > And this is useful to anyone how?
> >>
> >> Ask the Chinese.  *woof*
> >
> >Such is the world.  I can only protect mine.  If you want to eat my pets,
> >you better bring a gun and get me first.  Otherwise, I'll get you.  Of
> >course, if you are out looking for pets to eat, chances are you have
> bigger
> >problems.
>
> sigh!  You don't get it.  Do you think that farmers don't make
> pets out of the animals they care for?  Some don't but most
> do.  If they didn't have mother-hen emotions towards their
> livestock, the animals wouldn't thrive.

You don't get it.  This is not for me.  Period.  I don't care what farmers
do or why.  Enough already.

Slainte,
Fletch

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:409392f0$0$3031$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> In article <fKwkc.34978$eK3.8753@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
>    "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >news:c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> >> In article <brednRqDe_OrFQ_dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>,
> >> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >> >news:c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> >> >> In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
> >> >>  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >> >In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> >> >> >   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
> >> >> >>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
> >> >> >>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >> >> >>>  ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> > ....
> >> >> >>> > I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
> >> >> >>> > The right stimulation will bring
> >> >> >>> > out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>       Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> >times.
> >> >> >>> Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> >yourself.
> >> >> >>> It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what
> you
> >> >> >>> study.  Good luck!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with
> experimental
> >> >> >network
> >> >> >>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do
> find
> >the
> >> >> >>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.
> (Strong
> >> >love
> >> >> >>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
> >skills
> >> >> >>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in

> >life.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>If at all possible, do what you love.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
> >> >> >of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
> >> >> >harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
> >> >> >a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
> >> >>
> >> >> Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of
> his
> >> >> love for them.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
> >> >"harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly grew
> up
> >> >far from animals or livestock.
> >>
> >> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
> >> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
> >> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
> >
> >Didn't mean to start a wicked subthread.
>
> <grin>  But that's the nature of newsgroups.
>
> > ..  Just airing a small regret and
> >wish of mine.
>
> Well, there are a dearth of vets around.  If you can, visit
> Michigan State U.  or Tufts and see what they're doing w.r.t
> husbandry.
>
> >
> >I was thinking of a small-animal vet.
>
> I rarely think of vets who only treat cats and dogs.

Who gives a damn.

> > .. I am glad that there are people who
> >make farm animals' lives as pleasant as possible,
> > but this would not be my niche.
>
> But that's the niche that needs computing expertise.
>
> I just heard a news item about a study that "proved" chickens
> thrived better if they were free-range than if they were
> grown in a 1'x1'x1' (or whatever the dimensions are) cage. DUH!
> Any farmer's wife knows that.
>
> My folks had been ordering 100 chicks to grow for their food.
> They had a 99% survival rate.  The norm was 50%.  The difference
> was the care given where care means keeping them fed, clean,
> watered, warm, and not being eaten by fellow chicks.

Move along already.

Slainte,
Fletch

On 5/1/04 12:22 AM, in article
7ce4e226.0404302022.25a9c2cc@posting.google.com, "Harry Conover"
<hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote:

> glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
> news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
> 
>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
> 
> Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
> likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
> "animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.
> 
> Except in a city, the vast majority of vets focus their attention on
> the health of farm livestock like steers, dairy herds, swine, poultry,
> and sometimes even horses. The vet's function is to keep these animals
> healthy and productive until they age to the point of going to market.
> 
> Of course they love animals, and working with animals to maintain the
> animal's health. The fact that the animal was produced for the sole
> purposes of producing a food product or going to market isn't an
> issue.
> 
> I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
> with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not
> keep livestock for pets, and don't ever confuse their pets (dogs,
> cats, etc.) with their livestock. Neither do vets.
> 
>                                                     Harry C.

This sounds like a call for "JAMES HERRIOT!"

As a kid, I read all his books. Great stuff and I highly recommend them.

P

In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:

>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:

			.....................

>On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
>get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
>off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
>silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.

I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.  

Their statements are

	"Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

-- 
This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558

In article <40938f9d$0$3031$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
>In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>   Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>On 4/30/04 9:15 AM, in article 40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com,
>>
>>And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>
>Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
>were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.

We could apply the same logic to plants - just because a forester cuts 
down trees doesn't mean he hates them!

- Gerry Quinn

"Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@DELETETHISindigo.ie> wrote in message
news:AyOkc.6286$qP2.14488@news.indigo.ie...
> In article <40938f9d$0$3031$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv@aol.com
wrote:
> >In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
> >   Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>On 4/30/04 9:15 AM, in article 40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com,
> >>
> >>And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
> >
> >Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
> >were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>
> We could apply the same logic to plants - just because a forester cuts
> down trees doesn't mean he hates them!

If you are going to go that far afield, then why not bacteria?

Slainte,
Fletch

Dear Michael

or was that >>wok<< !
Paul

Michael Varney wrote:
> "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cYvkc.44200$2v.7920@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> 
>><jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
>>
>>>In article <c6tnp9$5l8$7@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
>>>   glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <40924fb4$0$28902$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>,
>>>><jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <uKrkc.6563$wY.2303@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
>>>>>  "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Ken Pledger" <Ken.Pledger@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:Ken.Pledger-FBD66B.17181730042004@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>>>>> ender@guiltyspark.org (Ender) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>....
>>>>>>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool....
>>>>>>>>The right stimulation will bring
>>>>>>>>out a genius in the right person(Isn't genius 132 anyway? ....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Here's the same advice as "Der Fugue" was given several
> 
> times.
> 
>>>>>>>Forget about genius, forget about I.Q., indeed forget about
> 
> yourself.
> 
>>>>>>>It's far more important to study what you enjoy, and enjoy what you
>>>>>>>study.  Good luck!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Excellent point.  I am a software engineer working with experimental
>>>>>
>>>>>network
>>>>>
>>>>>>protocols.  I generally followed my fathers footsteps, and I do find
>>
>>the
>>
>>>>>>work interesting.  But I wish that I had chosen to be a vet.  (Strong
>>>
>>>love
>>>
>>>>>>of animals.)  With any luck I can find a creative way to merge my
>>
>>skills
>>
>>>>>>with my passion.  It would be better to figure this out earlier in
>>
>>life.
>>
>>>>>>If at all possible, do what you love.
>>>>>
>>>>>Go visit some farms.  Even my relatives are doing some flavor
>>>>>of "high-tech".  Animals are getting fed, bedded, cleaned, and
>>>>>harvested by computer gear these days.  There has to be
>>>>>a ton of stuff to do just to make a vet's life managable.
>>>>
>>>>Somehow I don't think harvesting animals would be an expression of his
>>>>love for them.
>>>
>>>Then he has some growing up to do.
>>
>>So, someone either wants to harvest animals or they haven't grown up yet.
>>Thanks for spelling out your ground rules.
>>
>>
>>>We ate pets if they were food.
>>
>>And this is useful to anyone how?
> 
> 
> Ask the Chinese.  *woof*
> 
> 

"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:c7052j$u5e$3@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <7ce4e226.0404302022.25a9c2cc@posting.google.com>,
> Harry Conover <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
> >news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
> >
> >> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
> >> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
> >> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
> >
> >Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
> >likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
> >"animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.
>
> How in the world did this become an expression of my personal opinions of
> what vets do or what care a farm animal needs?  The man expressed a
> wistful dream of becoming a veterinarian, because of his deep love of
> animals.  I didn't think a job involving the harvesting of animals was
> consistent with that wistful dream.
>
> >
> >I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
> >with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not
>
> Or maybe I thought Fletch had pets, and not livestock, in mind.

And you were right.  Somehow this has turned into a "city folk don't know
shit about animals" type of argument.  Fact is, I was the one expressing the
wish of being a vet.  I am a city dweller (or nearly).  I was thinking of a
small-animal vet like the one I take my cats to.  I am the authority on me,
my thoughts, and my wishes.

Again, I am glad there are vets that take care of livestock.  But I could
not do it (or at least would not choose to).  It is not in my nature to work
on an animal that is to become food.  It is in my nature to adopt them all.
My girlfriend would kill me.

And for the "just grow up" crowd, please fuck off and don't reply.  I'm not
looking for animal desensitivity training.

Slainte,
Fletch

DaLoveRhino@hotmail.com (Love Rhino) wrote in message news:<84c8d9dc.0404302254.109d65c8@posting.google.com>...
> "Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> > I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> > /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> > just begging for one of two things to happen:
> > 
> > 1. A false sense of superiority
> > or
> > 2. A false sense of inferiority
> > 
> > Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
> > 
> 
> Just in case, exaggerate and tell him he's 180+.
> 
> If I had to choose, I'd pick 1.
> Why would a false sense of superiority be such a bad thing?
> 
> A 1-kid will initiate things, because he has the ego to think he's capable.
> He might fail, but law of averages states he'll succeed at some point
> which will only fuel his superiority complex.  A 2-kid would sulk in the 
> corner with inactivity.
> 

Go to any Mensa meeting.  You'll find (mostly) people who are so
convinced of their superiority due to IQ that most of them have never
tried to do ANYTHING.  Not only do such people contribute nothing to
society, they are insufferable, antisocial, and increasingly bitter as
they come to realize that most people do not care about their genius. 
They refuse to learn, because they think no one is qualified to teach
them (see Marylin Vos Savant), and they end up full of hate towards
the world that fails to praise them.

Someone who has an inferiority complex due to a low IQ, but who works
hard to overcome it, is more likely to be successful, and consequently
feel accomplished, as well as socially well-adjusted.  I'd argue that
the 2nd is better than the first, but that neither is best.

(Note to those from rec.org.mensa:  This is MY experience with your
organization's members.  I am not saying you are all this way.  If you
were offended by the description, then it probably does not apply to
you)

Nathan

On 5/1/04 12:27 PM, in article
c51c435f.0405010827.558fa406@posting.google.com, "Nathan Penton"
<npenton@hotmail.com> wrote:

> DaLoveRhino@hotmail.com (Love Rhino) wrote in message
> news:<84c8d9dc.0404302254.109d65c8@posting.google.com>...
>> "Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com>
>> wrote in message news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
>>> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
>>> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
>>> just begging for one of two things to happen:
>>> 
>>> 1. A false sense of superiority
>>> or
>>> 2. A false sense of inferiority
>>> 
>>> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>>> 
>> 
>> Just in case, exaggerate and tell him he's 180+.
>> 
>> If I had to choose, I'd pick 1.
>> Why would a false sense of superiority be such a bad thing?
>> 
>> A 1-kid will initiate things, because he has the ego to think he's capable.
>> He might fail, but law of averages states he'll succeed at some point
>> which will only fuel his superiority complex.  A 2-kid would sulk in the
>> corner with inactivity.
>> 
> 
> Go to any Mensa meeting.  You'll find (mostly) people who are so
> convinced of their superiority due to IQ that most of them have never
> tried to do ANYTHING.  Not only do such people contribute nothing to
> society, they are insufferable, antisocial, and increasingly bitter as
> they come to realize that most people do not care about their genius.
> They refuse to learn, because they think no one is qualified to teach
> them (see Marylin Vos Savant), and they end up full of hate towards
> the world that fails to praise them.
> 

Geez. I've been to Mensa meetings and didn't notice that at all. Except when
the talk turns to politics, everything and everyone seem pretty pleasant.

How many Mensa meetings have you been to? Maybe it's different in your neck
of the woods.

P

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
> 
> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> just begging for one of two things to happen:
> 
> 1. A false sense of superiority
> or
> 2. A false sense of inferiority
> 
> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.

It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
qualitative factor "Precision Processor".

(BTW, I'm 13)

-William S.

Richard Henry wrote:

> My son tests at 95th percentile.  Nonetheless, he brings home D's and F's on
> his report cardes.
> 
> I think he is conducting a social experiment to see how little work is
> required to get a passing grade.

Are Ds and Fs passing grades now? I wouldn't be surprised.

In article <pmPkc.14346$wY.9675@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
Fletch F. Fletch <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>news:c7052j$u5e$3@hood.uits.indiana.edu...

>>
>> Or maybe I thought Fletch had pets, and not livestock, in mind.
>
>And you were right.  Somehow this has turned into a "city folk don't know
>shit about animals" type of argument.  Fact is, I was the one expressing the

Sorry to have done this to you.  I probably just shouldn't have said 
anything.

-- 
"The preferred method of entering a building is to use a tank main gun 
round, direct fire artillery round, or TOW, Dragon, or Hellfire missile to
clear the first room." -- THE RANGER HANDBOOK U.S. Army, 1992 

In article <4093DD80.8060209@mail.com>, John Smith  <JSmith@mail.com> wrote:
>Richard Henry wrote:
>
>> My son tests at 95th percentile.  Nonetheless, he brings home D's and F's on
>> his report cardes.
>> 
>> I think he is conducting a social experiment to see how little work is
>> required to get a passing grade.
>
>Are Ds and Fs passing grades now? I wouldn't be surprised.

They're all part of the experimental process.  You can't know how low you 
can go until you hit bottom.


-- 
"A good plan executed right now is far better than a perfect plan
executed next week."
                       -Gen. George S. Patton

In article <c51c435f.0405010827.558fa406@posting.google.com>,
Nathan Penton <npenton@hotmail.com> wrote:
>DaLoveRhino@hotmail.com (Love Rhino) wrote in message
>news:<84c8d9dc.0404302254.109d65c8@posting.google.com>...
>> "Thomas G. Marshall"
><tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
>> > I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
>> > /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
>> > just begging for one of two things to happen:
>> > 
>> > 1. A false sense of superiority
>> > or
>> > 2. A false sense of inferiority
>> > 
>> > Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>> > 
>> 
>> Just in case, exaggerate and tell him he's 180+.
>> 
>> If I had to choose, I'd pick 1.
>> Why would a false sense of superiority be such a bad thing?
>> 
>> A 1-kid will initiate things, because he has the ego to think he's capable.
>> He might fail, but law of averages states he'll succeed at some point
>> which will only fuel his superiority complex.  A 2-kid would sulk in the 
>> corner with inactivity.
>> 
>
>Go to any Mensa meeting.  You'll find (mostly) people who are so
>convinced of their superiority due to IQ that most of them have never
>tried to do ANYTHING.  Not only do such people contribute nothing to
>society, they are insufferable, antisocial, and increasingly bitter as
>they come to realize that most people do not care about their genius. 
>They refuse to learn, because they think no one is qualified to teach
>them (see Marylin Vos Savant), and they end up full of hate towards
>the world that fails to praise them.

Sounds like some of the woo-woos on sci.physics.  A reasonably 
representative composite would be that a programmer or mechanic has found 
a simple and obvious flaw in special relativity.  It's gone unnoticed for 
a hundred years because of the brainwashing and desparation for peer 
acceptance in the educational and scientific institutes, and because 
scientists don't do any real-world things like fixing cars or throwing 
balls.  Practicing scientists have nothing to teach them for the same 
reasons, and you can't trust the establishment anyway because they laughed 
at Galileo and said rocks don't fall from the sky.  They're insensitive to 
criticisms of their own theory; the critics just don't understand it.  And 
the thread degenerates into a circular orgy of harsh language, and 
eventually the woo-woo will die without a single reference in the 
peer-reviewed scientific literature.  I have no idea what their IQs are.

-- 
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of 
mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it. "
  -- Gene Spafford, 1992

darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com (Darrell Grainger) wrote in message news:<Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>...
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:
> 
> > In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> > Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> >
> > >I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> >
> > Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I mean,
> > is there really a reputable group of psychologists around which still
> > puts any faith in these quaint measures of some absolute sort of
> > "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred of professionalism
> > by sharing this number with impressionable children who think it
> > says something important about them?)
> 
> When I was in grade 8 we had to decide which highschool we were going to.
> Some level of school was for people who had to go to highschool because it
> was the law. They'd be flipping burgers at BoogerSling. The next level was
> people with mechanical aptitude. They'd become plumbers, carpenters, etc.
> The highest level was people who would go on to university.
> 
> To help us out they gave us a bunch of tests, including an IQ test.
> Looking back, it was a stupid thing to do.

  That's because the IQ tests used in high school were designed by the
  Gestapo in WWI. So since it's really only lawyers who take them
  anyway, that's the same thing as plumbers taking them,
  so it makes no difference.


> 
> Sadly, there are still some schools that do this sort of thing. If the
> board has a 'gifted' program you have to have a certain IQ to get in. My
> wife missed by 2 points. Her sister got into the gifted program. A
> highschool diploma requires 27 or 32 credits in a 4 year period. My wife
> got 40 in a 3 year period, graudated with honours and went on to triple
> major at university within four years. Her sister graduated highschool
> with 32 credits and dropped out of university in the second year.
> 
> On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
> get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
> off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
> silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.

  But, what the guy didn't tell you is that he really
  works for a another guy with an IQ of 105. Who
  as luck would have it, is a wholesale distributor of
  rebuilt refrigerators made of parts discarded
  by Chinese refrigerator manufactures, trying
  to unload some toxic coolant. And the women
  dripping from him are unkown to him,
  his brother's hand-me-down aids-infected hookers.

hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in message news:<c70au8$2db0@odds.stat.purdue.edu>...
> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
> Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:
>  
> >> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> 
> 			.....................
> 
> >On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
> >get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
> >off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
> >silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
> 
> I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
> intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.  
> 
> Their statements are
> 
> 	"Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

  That's what them special though. They make
  $1,000,000 selling Novels, and IQs shitheds
  make shit-for-brains and shit-for-plumbers.

"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:c70q40$4u9$2@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <pmPkc.14346$wY.9675@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> Fletch F. Fletch <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >news:c7052j$u5e$3@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>
> >>
> >> Or maybe I thought Fletch had pets, and not livestock, in mind.
> >
> >And you were right.  Somehow this has turned into a "city folk don't know
> >shit about animals" type of argument.  Fact is, I was the one expressing
the
>
> Sorry to have done this to you.  I probably just shouldn't have said
> anything.

Not at all.  A dust up, nothing more.

Slainte,
Fletch

In article <Hr-dnfdJwePfuw7dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>, robduncan@gbronline.com 
says...
> I had a friend who was convinced that he was going to be the worst father
> possible.  I felt the same way.  Turns out he couldnt be a better parent.

It's the ones that are *not* worried about being a good parent that turn
out not to be.


-- 
Randy Howard                
2reply remove FOOBAR 
      

In article <GSOkc.35554$eK3.28384@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Gerry Quinn" <gerryq@DELETETHISindigo.ie> wrote in message
>news:AyOkc.6286$qP2.14488@news.indigo.ie...
>> In article <40938f9d$0$3031$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv@aol.com
>wrote:
>> >In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>> >   Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>On 4/30/04 9:15 AM, in article 40926ecf$0$28932$61fed72c@news.rcn.com,
>> >>
>> >>And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>> >
>> >Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
>> >were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>>
>> We could apply the same logic to plants - just because a forester cuts
>> down trees doesn't mean he hates them!
>
>If you are going to go that far afield, then why not bacteria?

The same would apply.

- Gerry Quinn

jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:

....[snipitty doo dah]...


> /BAH
>
> Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.


I decided to go and see what you had as a munged address.  Very
good---that was unexpected.  LOL.






-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

ZZBunker <zzbunker@netscape.net> coughed up the following:

> hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in message
> news:<c70au8$2db0@odds.stat.purdue.edu>...
>> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
>> Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:
>>
>>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>>
>> .....................
>>
>>> On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100).
>>> He can
>>> get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women
>>> dripping
>>> off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an
>>> eskimo (or
>>> silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
>>
>> I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
>> intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.
>>
>> Their statements are
>>
>> "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
>
>   That's what them special though. They make
>   $1,000,000 selling Novels, and IQs shitheds
>   make shit-for-brains and shit-for-plumbers.

I don't understand a word of what you were trying to say---------did you
mean: "That's what /makes/ them special though.  They make a million
dollars selling novels and shit-for-brains become plumbers?"



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:

> In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:

....[thwack]...

>> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>
> Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
> were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>
> My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
> out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
> more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
> get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
> semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
> have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.

It's called fucking twisted.

My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a farm
to no huge extent.

But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) than
dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the pig
got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.

That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as fuck
doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just
as wrong as can be.



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Gregory L. Hansen <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> coughed up the
following:

> In article <OumdnY25TtJwSg_dRVn-tA@gbronline.com>,
> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Gregory L. Hansen" <
>>> snip<
>>
>>>> Uhm, why dont you think the animals would need vets?  Why wouldnt
>>>> "harvesting animals" be an "expression of his love"?  You clearly
>>>> grew up far from animals or livestock.
>>>
>>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.
>>
>> Now I understand the basis for your mistake.  Why do you think the
>> above?
>
> Because of the people I've talked to that said they love animals or
> they wanted to be a vet.  Because any random speaker on Usenet is
> more likely a city boy than a farm boy.
>
>> Thousands and thousands of vets work in the arena of
>> ranching/livestock. Out of love.
>
> Out of love of the animals, or love of working with the animals?
>
>>
>>> I don't know how
>>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>>
>> If you ever knew an old country vet, youde know they treat livestock
>> better than modern physicians treat their patients.  A friend of
>> mine is a vet. She even performed surgery on a wonderful old dog of
>> mine.  If it had been a horse would she have cared for him any less?
>
> Or a steer two months away from slaughter?  Or a fryer chicken?  Work
> on food animals (those that are to be harvested) is an economic
> activity.
> Some problems, like an outbreak of hoof and mouth, are even treated by
> slaughtering the animals en masse.
>
> Didn't really seem consistent with "deep love of".  I saw images of
> "Oh,
> you like cats?  I know a place that skins them and sells the hides,
> you might like working there."

I've agreed with you from the begining of this dumbass sub-thread.  I
don't know /what/ have some people gotten so worked up about...




-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

In article <c70au8$2db0@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
Herman Rubin <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>>On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
>>get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
>>off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
>>silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
>
>I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
>intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.  

Right. (That's part of why it's important to educate people!)
But the key word is "intelligent". Plenty of people CAN be
easily swayed by charisma, which means the intelligent would
cultivate charisma in themselves. I try to win my arguments
on the strength of the inherent logic supporting my position. 
But I've also learned how to smile pleasantly and talk about golf...

dave

"Randy Howard" <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1afe0f76a8afd88d989790@news.verizon.net...
> In article <Hr-dnfdJwePfuw7dRVn-jw@gbronline.com>, robduncan@gbronline.com
> says...
> > I had a friend who was convinced that he was going to be the worst
father
> > possible.  I felt the same way.  Turns out he couldnt be a better
parent.
>
> It's the ones that are *not* worried about being a good parent that turn
> out not to be.
> Randy Howard

I see youve met my sister.


Rob

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com>
wrote in message news:AVZkc.501$vz5.181@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
>
> > In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
> >    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...[thwack]...
>
> >> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
> >
> > Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
> > were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
> >
> > My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
> > out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
> > more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
> > get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
> > semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
> > have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.
>
> It's called fucking twisted.
>
> My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a farm
> to no huge extent.
>
> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
> are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) than
> dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the pig
> got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.
>
> That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as fuck
> doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just
> as wrong as can be.

What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to slaughter
animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or something?  Why cant
farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their own way)

I remember one time having to de-horn a steer.  You put the young steer in
the blocks and you use this big chopper/cruncher device to chop off its
horns, then you shove a branding iron down inside the holes in its skull to
cauterize the exposed and torn vessels/arteries.  Well we had a bit of a
problem with the calf that was to go to the local fair with him.  Lots of
misery, lots of blood, lots of burnt blood/flesh/bone smell/smoke
everywhere.  We carried on, as there was no way out of the mess we were in.
The four of us were all splattered with blood. (Dean, his dad, his brother,
and I)  Dean, with tears streaming down his face, applied the branding iron
again and again.  To a calf that he had raised from birth.  I suppose the
situation could have been worse.  But it was bad enough as it was.

Had Dean known we were about to encounter what we did, would he have delayed
it or chosen not to do it?  Not a chance.  Its life.  Thats how life goes.
This isnt an antiseptic world where our food comes from happy, happy, feel
good, pretend ranches/farms.  This is the real world.  To pretend the
reality of ranching is "Twisted" is, at the bare minimum, moronic and
immature.


Rob

In article <AVZkc.501$vz5.181@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
   "Thomas G. Marshall" 
<tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:
>jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
>
>> In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>>    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>....[thwack]...
>
>>> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>>
>> Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
>> were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>>
>> My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
>> out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
>> more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
>> get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
>> semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
>> have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.
>
>It's called fucking twisted.
>
>My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a farm
>to no huge extent.
>
>But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
>are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) than
>dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the pig
>got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.

Yup.  That's life.  
>
>That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as fuck
>doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just
>as wrong as can be.

It's called priorities of living.  Eating happens to be high on the
list for survival.  Note that, w.r.t. bulls, when they mature,
IOW, their balls drop, they are no longer pets who are glad to 
see you; they become completely ruled by testosterone which 
causes them to stomp you.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <TEZkc.17615$wY.9976@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
   "Thomas G. Marshall" 
<tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:
>jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
>
>....[snipitty doo dah]...
>
>
>> /BAH
>>
>> Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
>
>
>I decided to go and see what you had as a munged address.  Very
>good---that was unexpected.  LOL.

Very good :-).  I was amazed at how many people had never
heard of a different numbering script.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
   "Fletch F. Fletch" <notme31415@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>

>Move along already.

The way to stop a newsgroup conversation is to not post.
You keep implying that you want to stop this conversation,
yet you don't stop.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <c7052j$u5e$3@hood.uits.indiana.edu>,
   glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>In article <7ce4e226.0404302022.25a9c2cc@posting.google.com>,
>Harry Conover <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
>>news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
>> 
>>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they 
>>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how 
>>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>>
>>Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
>>likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
>>"animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.
>
>How in the world did this become an expression of my personal opinions of
>what vets do or what care a farm animal needs?  The man expressed a
>wistful dream of becoming a veterinarian, because of his deep love of
>animals.  I didn't think a job involving the harvesting of animals was 
>consistent with that wistful dream.

But he can't kill them.  Vets kill as part of their job.  
>
>>
>>I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
>>with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not
>
>Or maybe I thought Fletch had pets, and not livestock, in mind.  

But he's not going to be able to do the work of a vet.  That's
why I suggested he look into how farms are going high tech.


/BAH


Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <c70au8$2db0@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
   hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
>In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
>Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:
>
>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
>>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>
>			.....................
>
>>On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
>>get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
>>off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo 
(or
>>silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
>
>I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
>intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.  

[puzzled emoticon here]  Charisma is a dangerous thing because
it can sway an intelligent person.  We just had a president who
oozed charisma and used it to sway people to overlook his
bad behaviour.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <a0ec6a9c.0405010903.24ae2975@posting.google.com>,
   wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote:
>"Thomas G. Marshall" 
<tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
>> I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
>> 
>> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
>> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
>> just begging for one of two things to happen:
>> 
>> 1. A false sense of superiority
>> or
>> 2. A false sense of inferiority
>> 
>> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>
>It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
>condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
>problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
>from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
>took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
>184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
>test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
>qualitative factor "Precision Processor".

Bullshit detector alert!!!

>
>(BTW, I'm 13)

It sure sounds like a joke test.  Precision processor?  And mental
profile?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:

>
>On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100). He can
>get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
>off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo (or
>silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.

In the book "Everything I Need To Know I Learned From Watching Star Trek", 
the author explained that the captain doesn't have to be an expert on 
everything.  He should surround himself with experts.  It's not the job of 
the commander to do the detailed work himself, it's his job to command.

-- 
"The main, if not the only, function of the word aether has been to 
furnish a nominative case to the verb 'to undulate'." 
  -- the Earl of Salisbury, 1894

"William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:a0ec6a9c.0405010903.24ae2975@posting.google.com...
> "Thomas G. Marshall"
<tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> > I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
> >
> > I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> > /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> > just begging for one of two things to happen:
> >
> > 1. A false sense of superiority
> > or
> > 2. A false sense of inferiority
> >
> > Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>
> It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
> condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
> problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
> from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
> took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
> 184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
> test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
> qualitative factor "Precision Processor".

Hey... do you want to buy a really nice piece of land I have for sale on the
moon?


> (BTW, I'm 13)

That is no excuse.

Here is some reading for you to do.

http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html

Then try to reflect on the topic.

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall"
> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in
> message news:AVZkc.501$vz5.181@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
>> jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
>>
>>> In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>>>    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ...[thwack]...
>>
>>>> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>>>
>>> Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
>>> were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>>>
>>> My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
>>> out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
>>> more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
>>> get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
>>> semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
>>> have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.
>>
>> It's called fucking twisted.
>>
>> My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a
>> farm
>> to no huge extent.
>>
>> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.
>> Pigs are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate
>> metrics) than dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice
>> versa.  When the pig got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had
>> it slaughtered.
>>
>> That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as
>> fuck doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality"
>> is just
>> as wrong as can be.
>
> What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
> slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
> something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their
> own way)
>
> I remember one time having to de-horn a steer.  You put the young
> steer in the blocks and you use this big chopper/cruncher device to
> chop off its horns, then you shove a branding iron down inside the
> holes in its skull to cauterize the exposed and torn
> vessels/arteries.  Well we had a bit of a problem with the calf that
> was to go to the local fair with him.  Lots of misery, lots of blood,
> lots of burnt blood/flesh/bone smell/smoke everywhere.  We carried
> on, as there was no way out of the mess we were in. The four of us
> were all splattered with blood. (Dean, his dad, his brother, and I)
> Dean, with tears streaming down his face, applied the branding iron
> again and again.  To a calf that he had raised from birth.  I suppose
> the situation could have been worse.  But it was bad enough as it
> was.
>
> Had Dean known we were about to encounter what we did, would he have
> delayed it or chosen not to do it?  Not a chance.  Its life.  Thats
> how life goes. This isnt an antiseptic world where our food comes
> from happy, happy, feel good, pretend ranches/farms.  This is the
> real world.  To pretend the reality of ranching is "Twisted" is, at
> the bare minimum, moronic and immature.

What's twisted is pretending to care for an animal and then kill it
merely for food.

I am a meat eater.  Some things just are as they are.  But to say that
someone "cares" for an animal that they fully intend to eat just doesn't
use the word "care" the same way.





-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:

> In article <AVZkc.501$vz5.181@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
>    "Thomas G. Marshall"
> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:
>> jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
>>
>>> In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
>>>    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ....[thwack]...
>>
>>>> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
>>>
>>> Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
>>> were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
>>>
>>> My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
>>> out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
>>> more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
>>> get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
>>> semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
>>> have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.
>>
>> It's called fucking twisted.
>>
>> My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a
>> farm to no huge extent.
>>
>> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.
>> Pigs are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate
>> metrics) than dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice
>> versa.  When the pig got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had
>> it slaughtered.
>
> Yup.  That's life.

Nope---that's not.  You don't really "feel" for an animal if you want to
just kill it for food.

Again, I'm a meat eater, maybe a slightly guilty one, but it is not a
contradiction for me to eat meat, since I have no emotional attachment
to any of the cattle.

But it is a HUGE contradiction to love an animal, and let it bond to
you, and then just decide that even though you love it and it loves you
that it really should be eaten.

Sorry, but THAT'S life.


....[thwack]...




-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Richard Henry wrote:

> "Alan Balmer" <albalmer@att.net> wrote in message
> news:7ct490hir6p3ia1akm18bomadhl08s0ou1@4ax.com...
> 
>>On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 10:04:49 GMT, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dave Rusin wrote:
>>>
>>>>Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>>>>
>>>>Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>>>>mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>>>>which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>>>>absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>>>>of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>>>>children who think it says something important about them?)
>>>
>>>Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>>>they were given in the school class room, and the results
>>>publicized to the individual at least.
>>
>>In my case, it was in the form of "You have an IQ of xxx - why are you
>>goofing off?

   Been there, did that, except they didn't tell me the 
number. Fortunately, I'd already learned that reading 
upside-down is as easy as rightside-up. I.Q. of 135 at age 
10 wasn't spectacular in them days (even considering the 
tests they used), but enough to give them ammunition to 
hammer me with.

   I didn't answer them honestly at the time ("because 
you're trying to hold me back with the kind of dimbulbs that 
had to recite multiplication tables for six weeks running to 
get the idea, and what you call 'goofing off' I call 
'independent research'") only because I didn't have the 
vocabulary. That, and I suspected they had a bigger hammer 
hidden somewhere.

   My stepson has a t-shirt that expresses the problem 
perfectly; "I'm hyperactive, don't bore me!"

   I am so very glad that I graduated before the advent of 
Ritalin. My stepson was hogtied with that shit and now he's 
ineligible for military service. They tried to do it to his 
sons, so we said "Fuck You" and put them in a Charter School 
that can handle hyperactives.

   My grandsons are double handfuls if you try to hold them 
down; show them how to walk and they fly on their own. They 
appear to be Severely Gifted and I for one will do 
everything I can to help them become UberGeeks. They WILL 
NOT become peasants.

>>> This gave the teachers an
>>>idea of what to expect, and worked reasonably well with the
>>>homogenous groups involved.  The whole process became highly
>>>non-PC in the following years, and was largely limited to
>>>do-it-yourself quiz books.
>>>
>>>They don't measure the laziness of the subject.
>>
>>See above :-)

   Hm. Is laziness definable as "the unwillingness or 
inability to stay in line with what's considered 'normal 
development' at a given time"? Homogeneity is peasantry.

> My son tests at 95th percentile.  Nonetheless, he brings home D's and F's on
> his report cardes.
> 
> I think he is conducting a social experiment to see how little work is
> required to get a passing grade.

   For me, it wasn't a matter of "how little work" but 
rather "doing the same damn thing repeatedly when I already 
get it".

   The Public Scruel System is predicated on the assumption 
that if you aren't squarely in the middle of the Bell curve, 
you're Bad. Face it; it's designed to churn out peasants.

   Ender should be glad he's only slightly on the high side 
of the curve; otherwise they'd be chainsawing off his square 
edges to make him fit into a nice, homogenous, round hole.

   Mark L. Fergerson

Ender wrote:

> "karen" <nothing@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<etAkc.2019$Wc4.7710@bcandid.telisphere.com>...
> 
>>"Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
>>news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>Hey,
>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is what
>>you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or average intelligence,
>>learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther along
>>than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
>>continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
>>
>>When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good grades
>>and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those are
>>immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your grades
>>were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you can
>>do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need to
>>learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
>>knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you
>>know, the more you know that you don't know.
>>
>>-karen

   Karen, I don't know (or care) how old you are, but you're 
dead on. That ought to be carved in stone somewhere.

> Wow, I posted in hopes of helping somebody in a feindishly lazy way,
> and in the end I got help myself. How about that. I read all of the
> posts and except for the little tangent about farm animals and such,
> it was all really good advice. Props to usenet.

   It works best when we don't insist on being the "helper", 
and accept that we can be the "helpee". So very many here 
(sci.physics) can't manage that. Humility is a hell of a 
burden sometimes.

   Don't disregard the bit about farm animals; happiness 
depends on satisfaction of intangibles. Until you figure out 
what your individual intangibles are (and how you got them), 
you can't be happy. Hell, you might even learn that you can 
choose your intangibles, but you can't escape reality (for 
very long, anyway). That's just the opinion of a Buddhist 
who's trying to identify his attachments (not necessarily 
eliminate them) so they don't run his life.

   Mark L. Fergerson

"Thomas G. Marshall"

> But it is a HUGE contradiction to love an animal, and let it bond to
> you, and then just decide that even though you love it and it loves you
> that it really should be eaten.
>
> Sorry, but THAT'S life.
>
>
> ...[thwack]...


I can tell, that you are young.  Someday, when you have the time,
investigate some Native American religions.  Indeed, people can *love and
*care for the very thing they one day intend on eating.  To presume a small
farmer doesnt become attached to his small herd of cattle is incorrect.

In farming communities high school students raise from birth cattle, swine,
etc., who will be sold at auction after being shown at the fair.  These
students are *very attached to their charges, and they know they are being
sold to be eaten.  They dont have any problems spending the money they get
either.  Its life.  Its reality.


Rob

"Herman Rubin"

> >On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100).

Thats not a "very low IQ"  Thats a perfectly normal IQ.  Its the IQ that the
majority of people share.  When we start viewing normal everyday people as
having "very low IQ's" we need to take a step back and examine a thing or
two.

>He can
> >get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women dripping
> >off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an eskimo
(or
> >silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
>
> I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
> intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.
>
> Their statements are
>
> "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

In college there was a guy in the dorms who had a "very low IQ".  I mean
very low.  It had to be around 80.  But through tutering, very hard work,
and single mindedness he managed to graduate.  He now has a small firm all
his own.  There are exceptions.  (somewhat related to the thread where we
devolved into discussing the atributes of effort)

This was around the time that Pee Wee Herman made his first movie.  This guy
looked "up" to Pee Wee and immitated him every chance he had.  It didnt help
that he was a dead ringer for him.


Rob

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<XKZkc.17637$wY.6657@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> ZZBunker <zzbunker@netscape.net> coughed up the following:
> 
> > hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in message
> > news:<c70au8$2db0@odds.stat.purdue.edu>...
> >> In article <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404301325570.29148@drj.pf>,
> >> Darrell Grainger <darrell@NOMORESPAMcs.utoronto.ca.com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Dave Rusin wrote:
>  
> >>>> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> >>>> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> .....................
> >>
> >>> On the other hand, I know someone with a very low IQ (under 100).
> >>> He can
> >>> get people to do anything. This is the sort of guy who has women
> >>> dripping
> >>> off him (he is not great looking) and could sell a fridge to an
> >>> eskimo (or
> >>> silent movies to a blind man). An IQ does not measure charisma.
> >>
> >> I consider charisma to be a dangerous thing, and that no
> >> intelligent person can be easily swayed by it.
> >>
> >> Their statements are
> >>
> >> "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
> >
> >   That's what them special though. They make
> >   $1,000,000 selling Novels, and IQs shitheds
> >   make shit-for-brains and shit-for-plumbers.
> 
> I don't understand a word of what you were trying to say---------did you
> mean: "That's what /makes/ them special though.  They make a million
> dollars selling novels and shit-for-brains become plumbers?"

  No. I avoided using the "make" word because
  that's how the authors make a million dollars.
  They let Mensa groups do the spelling
  corrections, and let math groups do the
  plumbing.

wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote in message news:<a0ec6a9c.0405010903.24ae2975@posting.google.com>...
> "Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> > I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
> > 
> > I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> > /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> > just begging for one of two things to happen:
> > 
> > 1. A false sense of superiority
> > or
> > 2. A false sense of inferiority
> > 
> > Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
> 
> It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
> condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
> problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
> from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
> took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
> 184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
> test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
> qualitative factor "Precision Processor".

  It is that, because it is the idiots who *run the schools*
  and not the gifted people who make up the tests.

  So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
  who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
  throwback who believes sets exist.
 
  


> 
> (BTW, I'm 13)
> 
> -William S.

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Lf9lc.18615$wY.9681@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
> 
> > In article <AVZkc.501$vz5.181@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
> >    "Thomas G. Marshall"
> > <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> coughed up the following:
> >>
> >>> In article <BCB836D0.AFE1%gistak@hotmail.com>,
> >>>    Gistak <gistak@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ....[thwack]...
> >>
> >>>> And was the eating of them an expression of your love for them?
> >>>
> >>> Nope.  The animals were being grown for food.  Just because they
> >>> were future food didn't mean that we didn't care about them.
> >>>
> >>> My aunt grew veal on the hoof.  She always ended up making a pet
> >>> out of the runt of the litter.  Mostly because she had to spend
> >>> more time working with the calf to keep it alive.  So she'ld
> >>> get an emotional attachment with the animal.  When the
> >>> semi came to pick up the herd, they'ld reject the runt.  She'ld
> >>> have him butchered and ate him.  It's called reality.
> >>
> >> It's called fucking twisted.
> >>
> >> My grandfather was a "gentleman farmer".  He actually would run a
> >> farm to no huge extent.
> >>
> >> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.
> >> Pigs are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate
> >> metrics) than dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice
> >> versa.  When the pig got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had
> >> it slaughtered.
> >
> > Yup.  That's life.
> 
> Nope---that's not.  You don't really "feel" for an animal if you want to
> just kill it for food.
> 
> Again, I'm a meat eater, maybe a slightly guilty one, but it is not a
> contradiction for me to eat meat, since I have no emotional attachment
> to any of the cattle.
> 
> But it is a HUGE contradiction to love an animal, and let it bond to
> you, and then just decide that even though you love it and it loves you
> that it really should be eaten.

  I think it's modern day concept.

A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
Indian, eating more vegetrians. My wishign was not so much for
enviornmental debate as much as my thinking how animals also might
have feelings and stuff.

 Not too long ago, I found myself eating dinner (chicken in fact)
while watching a program on TV talking about chicken raised for food
and how much room they had, how long they were let out, etc. When I
noticed that I didn't slow dodn a bit from my eating, it was when i
almot finsihed eating, i.e I had been watching the program
enthuiastically while eating...chicken. That's after I have been
feeling sorry for the chickens and cows, and all that. I kind of felt
amused about myself.

I do know that I would not be able to imagine the two parrots (my
sister has) be killed and consumed as food (just assume that I am
talking about these parrots as if they were chickens). But if it does
happen, I don't think I will have much trouble getting over it, not
after I realized my not slowing down eating chicken while watching
that program.

I don't know whether that's just life or just being so used to eating
meat and don't know how to cope without consuming it.






> 
> Sorry, but THAT'S life.
> 
> 
> ...[thwack]...

Amanda wrote:


> A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
> primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
> Indian, eating more vegetrians. 

I think consuming vegetarians would still be considered eating meat.

TMG wrote:

> Amanda wrote:
> 
> 
>> A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
>> primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
>> Indian, eating more vegetrians. 
> 
> I think consuming vegetarians would still be considered eating meat.

More like veggie burgers though.

-- 
Thomas.

In article <w8SdnbTuE6XCAQndRVn-hw@gbronline.com>, Rob Duncan wrote:
>> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
>> are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) than
>> dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the pig
>> got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.
>>
>> That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as fuck
>> doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just as
>> wrong as can be.
> 
> What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
> slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
> something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their own
> way)

It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not eat pets
except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the man bonded with
that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought him tears.  It clearly
made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed that meat right then, it would
have made him happier to keep it alive--he could always slaughter it next
week or month or year.

-- 
--Tim Smith

In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, Fletch F. Fletch wrote:
[stuff deleted]

http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

-- 
--Tim Smith

Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, Fletch F.
> Fletch wrote: [stuff deleted]
>
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

Thank you.

Slainte,
Fletch

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:

> Tim Smith wrote:
> 
>>In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, Fletch F.
>>Fletch wrote: [stuff deleted]
>>
>>http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
> 
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Slainte,
> Fletch

There is another solution - stop using OE.

Tim Smith wrote:

> It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not eat pets
> except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the man bonded with
> that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought him tears.  It clearly
> made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed that meat right then, it would
> have made him happier to keep it alive--he could always slaughter it next
> week or month or year.
> 
Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.  If 
it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

"Tim Smith"

> > What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
> > slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
> > something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their
own
> > way)
>
> It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not eat
pets
> except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the man bonded with
> that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought him tears.  It clearly
> made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed that meat right then, it would
> have made him happier to keep it alive--he could always slaughter it next
> week or month or year.
>
> -- 
> --Tim Smith

You obviously know *nothing* about modern swine.  Do you have *any* idea how
HUGE they become?


Rob

Amanda wrote:


> A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
> primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
> Indian, eating more vegetrians.

you want to be cannibal instead ? :)

sammi

TMG wrote:
> Fletch F. Fletch wrote:
>
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>
>>> In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, Fletch F.
>>> Fletch wrote: [stuff deleted]
>>>
>>> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Slainte,
>> Fletch
>
> There is another solution - stop using OE.

Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I wedded to
Microsoft, using OE just required no time.

Slainte,
Fletch

Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com> coughed up the following:

> Tim Smith wrote:
>
>> It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not
>> eat pets except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the
>> man bonded with that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought
>> him tears.  It clearly made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed
>> that meat right then, it would have made him happier to keep it
>> alive--he could always slaughter it next week or month or year.
>>
> Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.  If
> it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.

If /what/ bothers him so much?  Killing and eating animals?  That isn't
the issue, and never was, and you'd realize that if you actually read
what he (and I before him) wrote.  It's the killing of an animal even
though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the issue.




-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

> "Tim Smith"
>
>>> What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
>>> slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
>>> something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in
>>> their own way)
>>
>> It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not
>> eat pets except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the
>> man bonded with that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought
>> him tears.  It clearly made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed
>> that meat right then, it would have made him happier to keep it
>> alive--he could always slaughter it next week or month or year.
>>
>> --
>> --Tim Smith
>
> You obviously know *nothing* about modern swine.  Do you have *any*
> idea how HUGE they become?

Some can certainly become enormous.  But so what?

HE.  LIVED.  ON.  A.  FARM!



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Noah Roberts wrote:

> Fletch F. Fletch wrote:
> 
>> Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I wedded to
>> Microsoft, using OE just required no time.
> 
> 
> Mozilla or FreeAgent.
> 

Also consider Thunderbird, still in beta
but pretty good. (www.mozilla.org)


-- 
"It is impossible to make anything foolproof
because fools are so ingenious"
  - A. Bloch

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:

> Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I wedded to
> Microsoft, using OE just required no time.

Mozilla or FreeAgent.

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:

> TMG wrote:
> 
>>Fletch F. Fletch wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tim Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <l6Nkc.35496$eK3.3462@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>, Fletch F.
>>>>Fletch wrote: [stuff deleted]
>>>>
>>>>http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>>>
>>>
>>>Thank you.
>>>
>>>Slainte,
>>>Fletch
>>
>>There is another solution - stop using OE.
> 
> 
> Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I wedded to
> Microsoft, using OE just required no time.
> 
> Slainte,
> Fletch

Yep - read my full headers OR: 
http://texturizer.net/thunderbird/download.html

Non-MS Browser and NewsReader - Linux, Mac/OSX, Windows.

If you want a good WinTel mail reader, Forte's FreeAgent is very good:

http://www.forteinc.com/agent/index.php

Oes cwestiynau? (Rydw i'n siarad Cymraeg)

Diolch yn fawr,
- T

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall"
>
>> But it is a HUGE contradiction to love an animal, and let it bond to
>> you, and then just decide that even though you love it and it loves
>> you that it really should be eaten.
>>
>> Sorry, but THAT'S life.
>>
>>
>> ...[thwack]...
>
>
> I can tell, that you are young.  Someday, when you have the time,
> investigate some Native American religions.  Indeed, people can *love
> and *care for the very thing they one day intend on eating.  To
> presume a small farmer doesnt become attached to his small herd of
> cattle is incorrect.
>
> In farming communities high school students raise from birth cattle,
> swine, etc., who will be sold at auction after being shown at the
> fair.  These students are *very attached to their charges, and they
> know they are being sold to be eaten.  They dont have any problems
> spending the money they get either.  Its life.  Its reality.

I'm 39.

That means that they are simply not getting attached enough to save the
animal's life.  And I cannot understand how the level of attachment can
be so low in my grandfather's case when he clearly was crying about it
being slaughtered.

There's a fundamental dichotomy in that.  You don't kill an animal that
you love just because it's a pig and that's what you "supposed to do" to
pigs.


-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

TMG <TMG@Nowhere.org> coughed up the following:

> Amanda wrote:
>
>
>> A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
>> primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
>> Indian, eating more vegetrians.
>
> I think consuming vegetarians would still be considered eating meat.

You stole my thunder.  I was soooooo hoping no one was gonna post that
before I did.

...............dang.



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

karen <nothing@nospam.com> coughed up the following:

> "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
> news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>> Hey,
>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the
>> 120s. <snip>
>
> Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom
> is what you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or
> average intelligence, learns a lot, and learns to apply that
> knowledge, will be much farther along than a person who starts off
> with a high intelligence, learns some, and continues to make foolish
> decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.

He's 14.  Getting laid is the goal.  If he's a guy, then it'll stay his
goal for a longggggggggggggggg time.


> When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good
> grades and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both
> of those are immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one
> cares what your grades were, and they care even less what your IQ
> might be.  They care if you can do the job, if you have a good
> attitude, if you can learn what you need to learn, if you can get
> along with your co-workers.  Some of that is knowledge, some of that
> is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you know, the more
> you know that you don't know.
>
> -karen

-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:

> TMG <TMG@Nowhere.org> coughed up the following:
> 
> 
>>Amanda wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
>>>primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
>>>Indian, eating more vegetrians.
>>
>>I think consuming vegetarians would still be considered eating meat.
> 
> 
> You stole my thunder.  I was soooooo hoping no one was gonna post that
> before I did.
> 
> ..............dang.

Sorry - she screamed out for that particular slap.

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:

> karen <nothing@nospam.com> coughed up the following:
> 
> 
>>"Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
>>news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>Hey,
>>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the
>>>120s. <snip>
>>
>>Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom
>>is what you do with it.  A person who starts off with a low or
>>average intelligence, learns a lot, and learns to apply that
>>knowledge, will be much farther along than a person who starts off
>>with a high intelligence, learns some, and continues to make foolish
>>decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
> 
> 
> He's 14.  Getting laid is the goal.  If he's a guy, then it'll stay his
> goal for a longggggggggggggggg time.
> 

Ohhh - so true. He also has a bit of quick wit.

I only read out of sci.physics, so this may have been noted elsewhere - 
I noticed at the first time I read his name - "Ender". Ender is a 
character in Orson Scott Card's series of sci-fi novels. Actually - VERY 
well written. The character Ender (a high level savant) is selected, 
trained, twisted, and ultimately deceived by the system.

I know - strange to assume we have free time to read, but the series is 
enjoyable.

TMG wrote:


> I only read out of sci.physics, so this may have been noted elsewhere
> - I noticed at the first time I read his name - "Ender". Ender is a
> character in Orson Scott Card's series of sci-fi novels. Actually -
> VERY well written. The character Ender (a high level savant) is
> selected, trained, twisted, and ultimately deceived by the system.

you can read the story on-line;
http://www.hatrack.com/osc/stories/enders-game.shtml

sammi

"Thomas G. Marshall" <

> > You obviously know *nothing* about modern swine.  Do you have *any*
> > idea how HUGE they become?
>
> Some can certainly become enormous.  But so what?
>
> HE.  LIVED.  ON.  A.  FARM!

Because he was a farmer do you assume that he is so dumb as to want a 900 lb
animal following him around all the time?  Imagine the trouble that could
possibly create.  Modern pigs *have to be butchered.  They are breed to grow
to immense proportions in as short a time as possible.

Saying all this... I like pigs.  I think theyre real smart, theyre
lovey-dovey, trainable, they have charactor, theyre fun.  But a modern pig,
of the type were talking about, can not exist as a pet.  At least not
comfortably.

I think people confuse pigs with these teeny-tiny pigs we always see on tv
and in the movies.  Real pigs become ENOURMOUS.  HUGE.  GIGANTIC.  Really,
im not kidding.  The poor guy probably couldnt even come indoors anymore.

I went to a deer farm once. The guy loved these obviously tender and caring
animals.  Lots of fun antics in the fawns.  But they too were all bound for
the butcher block.  And this guy loved them all.  To death.  >oops!<
Imagine, feeling guilty because one needs to eat.  LOL



Rob

"Thomas G. Marshall"

> > Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.  If
> > it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.
>
> If /what/ bothers him so much?  Killing and eating animals?  That isn't
> the issue, and never was, and you'd realize that if you actually read
> what he (and I before him) wrote.  It's the killing of an animal even
> though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the issue.

So bonding, a combined result of cortisols effects and emotional attachment,
is sound basis for forming a moral stance?  Bonding... makes the act
immoral?  Im not arguing against the point, Im asking if thats what you
meant.


Rob

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
> Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com> coughed up the following:
> 
> 
>>Tim Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not
>>>eat pets except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the
>>>man bonded with that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought
>>>him tears.  It clearly made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed
>>>that meat right then, it would have made him happier to keep it
>>>alive--he could always slaughter it next week or month or year.
>>>
>>
>>Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.  If
>>it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.
> 
> 
> If /what/ bothers him so much?  Killing and eating animals?  That isn't
> the issue, and never was, and you'd realize that if you actually read
> what he (and I before him) wrote.  It's the killing of an animal even
> though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the issue.

Who are you protecting when you don't kill an animal you have bonded 
with, yourself or the animal?

If you hadn't bonded with the animal would you still kill it, or are you 
too much of a pussy to do your own killing?

Kind of selfish when you think of it that way isn't it...

That is why I said that if you don't like it you shouldn't eat meat. 
Otherwise you are just being a selfish jerk with no respect for the 
lives you are taking.

THAT is the issue; something your grandfather, from your description of 
him, clearly understood.  Maybe he was a better, more loving man than 
you give him credit for.

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

> "Thomas G. Marshall"
>
>>> Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.
>>> If it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.
>>
>> If /what/ bothers him so much?  Killing and eating animals?  That
>> isn't the issue, and never was, and you'd realize that if you
>> actually read what he (and I before him) wrote.  It's the killing of
>> an animal even though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the
>> issue.
>
> So bonding, a combined result of cortisols effects and emotional
> attachment, is sound basis for forming a moral stance?  Bonding...
> makes the act immoral?  Im not arguing against the point, Im asking
> if thats what you meant.

Not exactly, but almost.

When you bond with an animal, especially one as intelligent as a pig,
you are setting up a relationship with that animal.  It learns to
/trust/ you.

It would follow him around because it trusted him.  That trust gets
violated in the end.



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com> coughed up the following:

....[thwackripshredteargash]...

> Who are you protecting when you don't kill an animal you have bonded
> with, yourself or the animal?
>
> If you hadn't bonded with the animal would you still kill it, or are
> you too much of a pussy to do your own killing?

If the animal bonded with me, then there is trust there.  It /trusts/ me
enough to follow me around and interact with me.  It feels as if it
knows me.

Until it is placed on the hook to bleed out.


> Kind of selfish when you think of it that way isn't it...
>
> That is why I said that if you don't like it you shouldn't eat meat.
> Otherwise you are just being a selfish jerk with no respect for the
> lives you are taking.

It has nothing to do with me eating an animal that I have not bonded
with.  Go ahead, say this again, and I'll just answer you again until
you finally figure it out.

Here I'll make it even clearer, ok?

Bonded with but unnecessarily killed for food, bad.
Earned trust of but unnecessarily killed for food, bad.
Played with, had fun with, loved and got loved returned from but
unnecessarily killed for food, bad.
Bonded with but decided to keep alive because of that relationship,
good.

You can disagree with me concerning whether or not what my grandfather
did was a bad thing.  That's fine.  There are others here who disagree
as well.  But don't try to oversimplify the issue by saying that I
shouldn't eat meat.  That's a clearly unwarranted extrapolation.


-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

> Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I wedded to
> Microsoft, using OE just required no time.

If you want News/Mail/Browsing, Mozilla/Netscape.  For News/Mail 
separate from browsing, Mozilla Thunderbird.  They work under non-MS
operating systems too ...

At the bottom of this post is something that happened to my family.  If
youre squeemish, emotional, an animal lover, particularly caring, etc.,
please dont progress beyond the warning at the end of this initial post.  (I
added this after writing what happened, I can see someone becoming upset
over this)

"Thomas G. Marshall"


> > I can tell, that you are young.  Someday, when you have the time,
> > investigate some Native American religions.  Indeed, people can *love
> > and *care for the very thing they one day intend on eating.  To
> > presume a small farmer doesnt become attached to his small herd of
> > cattle is incorrect.
> >
> > In farming communities high school students raise from birth cattle,
> > swine, etc., who will be sold at auction after being shown at the
> > fair.  These students are *very attached to their charges, and they
> > know they are being sold to be eaten.  They dont have any problems
> > spending the money they get either.  Its life.  Its reality.

> That means that they are simply not getting attached enough to save the
> animal's life.  And I cannot understand how the level of attachment can
> be so low in my grandfather's case when he clearly was crying about it
> being slaughtered.

You simply live in a different emotional world than others do.  Others defer
to reality.  I would suggest refraining from making moral judgements based
on your individual inability to understand others behavior.  (especially
considering that their behavior is perfectly normal.)

> There's a fundamental dichotomy in that.  You don't kill an animal that
> you love just because it's a pig and that's what you "supposed to do" to
> pigs.

On the contrary.  Thats exactly what is done.   Whats that book about a kid
who befriends a deer?  His dad has real bad arthritis?  The deer breaks
into, and eats, many times, part of their sparce crops?  Its killing me.
The Yearling?... no, something like that though.   IRL I bet you are a very
kind and non-confrontational person.  But if your livelyhood was
farming/ranching youde learn to deal with these emotions in a different way
than you do now.  You can feel sad without feeling guilty.


Rob

(Spoiler below.  Dont read if you have a week stomach)
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Sigh... This is the worst thing Ive ever seen happen to an animal.  It was
bad, real bad.  It even made my uncle and step-father cry while in the midst
of it.  My uncle had a goat for a long, long time.  They absolutely adored
her.  She gave great milk.  They would make different cheeses from it even.
She was a doll to be around.  She knew the trick of head butting you gently
if she ever caught you bending over.  Which she seemed to do all the time.
She was never corraled or leashed.  She had full reign of my uncles
property.  She was a part of the family.

As years passed she slowed somewhat. Stopped producing milk.  Still though,
an utter joy to be around.  Then as age does, it was quickly advancing on
her at a point.  She became lame... the vet was called.  Worst news
possible.  She had cancer.  She was going to die.  Not in a good way either.
My uncle decided to baby her for a few days so she was happy and content,
and then end her life suddenly without any advance notice.  So she would
never suspect or feel it coming.  Okay, this is where it gets bad.

We went over to my uncles house on her final day.  They were going to lead
her to the back pasture, feed her as much of her favorite treats she could
possibly want, say goodbye, pet her... you know, you can imagine how tough
it would be to do this.  They made sure she was as happy as a goat can be.

Well, my uncle pulls out a gun while petting her.  He puts it to the back of
her skull.  He is still being tough, no tears yet.  He takes his time, then,
CRACK he fires off a round into her head.  She SCREAMS, he falls back
mortified.  She drops to her knees, blood pouring out the back of her skull.
Both my uncle and my dad are in total shock.  Who knew a goats head can
withstand a .32?  Without dragging out the story... they fired 5 more rounds
into the back of her skull... all the while blood is flying everywhere, she
is screaming sounds that only come from the depths of hell.  My dad RUNS to
the closest shed.  Theyre in a wild panic to end her misery.  My dad comes
back with an ax.

My dad chopped and chopped until that poor thing died.  I will never forget
that.  Ever.  True story.  This brings up such a bad memory I almost feel
like not sending this.  But shit happens in life... you gotta deal with it.
I hope nobody, who would be upset by this, was dumb enough to ignore my
warning.


Rob

sam ende wrote:

> TMG wrote:
> 
>>I only read out of sci.physics, so this may have been noted elsewhere
>>- I noticed at the first time I read his name - "Ender". Ender is a
>>character in Orson Scott Card's series of sci-fi novels. Actually -
>>VERY well written. The character Ender (a high level savant) is
>>selected, trained, twisted, and ultimately deceived by the system.
> 
> 
> you can read the story on-line;
> http://www.hatrack.com/osc/stories/enders-game.shtml
> 
> sammi


Yes - That's the short story cut as originally published in "Analog in 
'77" . How many of the current readers read the original (vintage?) 
"Analog" - for some here, it was a core driver - science and adventure.

I was really referring to the "full" novel version from about 10 years 
ago. Spawned a series of uneven quality.

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:
> 
> 
>>"Thomas G. Marshall"
....
 >>> it's the killing of
>>>an animal even though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the
>>>issue.
>>
>>So bonding, a combined result of cortisols effects and emotional
>>attachment, is sound basis for forming a moral stance?  Bonding...
>>makes the act immoral?  Im not arguing against the point, Im asking
>>if thats what you meant.
> 
> 
> Not exactly, but almost.
> 
> When you bond with an animal, especially one as intelligent as a pig,
> you are setting up a relationship with that animal.  It learns to
> /trust/ you.
> 
> It would follow him around because it trusted him.  That trust gets
> violated in the end.

OT for all these NGs, should be in foo.ethics ... oh well.

Many animals certainly seem to feel pain and to experience
some emotions -- fear certainly -- but "trust" is something
that I would not attribute to a pig.  /Maybe/ some of the
other social primates (and /maybe/ dogs, after a few thousand
generations of close association with and selection by humans).
Unless you mean by trust only that the animal does not see you
as a threat ... in which case we'd best outlaw duck blinds and
other hunting stratagems, and most of the practices of humane
slaughter.

I don't see that anthropomorphizing animals is a reliable
guide to their ethical treatment.

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:

> You can disagree with me concerning whether or not what my grandfather
> did was a bad thing.  That's fine.  There are others here who disagree
> as well.  But don't try to oversimplify the issue by saying that I
> shouldn't eat meat.  That's a clearly unwarranted extrapolation.
> 
> 

No it isn't.  You are being hypocritical.  It is ok to kill an animal 
for food so long as you don't feel bad doing it.  It makes me sick.  You 
are deminishing the gift you are given by the animal that has died.  You 
don't deserve to eat its flesh.

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

Rob Duncan wrote:

> I went to a deer farm once. The guy loved these obviously tender and caring
> animals.  Lots of fun antics in the fawns.  But they too were all bound for
> the butcher block.  And this guy loved them all.  To death.  >oops!<
> Imagine, feeling guilty because one needs to eat.  LOL

How could you not love something that has given its life so that your 
stomach doesn't growl?

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

Rob Duncan wrote:
True story.  This brings up such a bad memory I almost feel
> like not sending this.  But shit happens in life... you gotta deal with it.
> I hope nobody, who would be upset by this, was dumb enough to ignore my
> warning.

Things like that happen.  I have incorrectly dispatched an animal or 
two.  Part ignorance, part squeemishness...its horrible, the things you 
then have to do.

-- 
"I'm a war president.  I make decisions here in the Oval Office
  in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

In article <XMudnQ5sI4cZBQjdRVn-gg@scnresearch.com>, Noah Roberts wrote:
> Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.  If it
> bothers you so much become a vegetarian.

Most farmers don't cry when they kill their animals.  They may care for
their food animals, but they do not treat them as pets.  When an animal
becomes a pet, it is not rational to kill it, just because it happens to be
the same species as some of the food animals.

-- 
--Tim Smith

Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <w8SdnbTuE6XCAQndRVn-hw@gbronline.com>, Rob Duncan wrote:
> >> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
> >> are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) than
> >> dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the pig
> >> got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.
> >>
> >> That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as fuck
> >> doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just as
> >> wrong as can be.
> >
> > What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
> > slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
> > something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their own
> > way)
>
> It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not eat pets
> except as a last resort.  Read the post above again: the man bonded with
> that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought him tears.  It clearly
> made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed that meat right then, it would
> have made him happier to keep it alive--he could always slaughter it next
> week or month or year.
>
> --
> --Tim Smith

Dale Trynor wrote:
I have seen the argument made that pointed out that we treat our cats and dogs
with such remarkably affection and yet they are considered inferior to many farm
animals. Looking at it from this prospective it dose become absurd to spend a
considerable amount on vet bills to save a useless cat or dog, but yet without
regard kill a farm animal that we felt an equal amount for only to sell it for
the same monetary amount as we otherwise would have spent to save an even more
worthless cat or dog.
But alternatively if your beloved farm animal doesn't have much longer to live
anywise it makes little sense to not eat it and perhaps there is no real
rational reason why this should not also be true of cats and dogs, yet we throw
them away and they are known to be good for food, ask the Asians. This is a
quite a different thing than simply killing it to eat as this simply becomes a
mater of not being wasteful and is not so much like betraying a creature that is
becoming sick that had came to see you as its father. This tendency to betray a
creature that trusted us to treat it better than that is what tends to bother me
more than anything else about this subject and the idea that we could be
emotional attached to the creature makes it even more uncomfortable to me. If
you just raise an animal without these learned promise of trust then it becomes
less of a betrayal sort of thing and  its best when farm animals are really
dumb, as otherwise how would you view an exceedingly rare mutation that had
human intelligence, should they still be food. With our culture its questionable
that we are evolved enough for intelligent machines equal to ourselves, the
abuse would very easily be nightmarish.

I have to wonder if a more intelligent and longer lived creature were to farm
humans what real moral arguments would we have against them when we are this way
ourselves. Where would such a line end or begin.

This subject is one of the most irrational of our culture, as we so easily eat
our bacon or chicken nuggets while watching the tv saying how important it was
no animals were hurt for the making of this film. We see protest of the use of
animals for research while some slaughter houses were bleeding their animals to
death as was was done because it was kosher. So perhaps what so many mindless
protesters really want, even without their consciously realizing it, is that its
ok to kill animals for trivial reasons, but not for important ones. The dead
chickens in the box of nuggets would be so happy if they had only known.
It just sometimes seams like none of anything makes much sense when the meaning
of life gets involved.
I feel better now.
Dale

TMG <TMG@Nowhere.org> wrote in message news:<ebudnb5hgtYg5QjdRVn-vw@comcast.com>...
> Amanda wrote:
> 
> 
> > A few year ago, I started wishing that I wasn't raised on meat as my
> > primary source of protein.  I mean, I wished I was raised more like
> > Indian, eating more vegetrians. 
> 
> I think consuming vegetarians would still be considered eating meat.

Oops.

"Noah Roberts" <nroberts@dontemailme.com> wrote in message
news:A5GdnVwmbL2bVwjdRVn_iw@scnresearch.com...
> Rob Duncan wrote:
> True story.  This brings up such a bad memory I almost feel
> > like not sending this.  But shit happens in life... you gotta deal with
it.
> > I hope nobody, who would be upset by this, was dumb enough to ignore my
> > warning.
>
> Things like that happen.  I have incorrectly dispatched an animal or
> two.  Part ignorance, part squeemishness...its horrible, the things you
> then have to do.


My nextdoor neighbor picked up and adopted a stray dog.  I went on a walk
with her and the dog.  The dog uncovered a squirrel hiding in the parking
strip.  He chomped it just enough to paralyze its lower half.  I had to
stomp its head in to put it out of its misery.  Sometimes you just have to
do things that are distasteful to end suffering.  Life isnt a bed of roses.
This same dog found a momma cats kits.  He killed the mother cat... but
wouldnt so much as touch the 5 or 6 week old kittens.  Again, this same
neighbor adopted the kittens.  Fed them with an eye dropper for several
weeks, then wet food, then dry food.  She found a home for one and kept two.


Rob

In article <lbflc.2170$a47.1344@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
   Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>In article <w8SdnbTuE6XCAQndRVn-hw@gbronline.com>, Rob Duncan wrote:
>>> But he actually had a baby pig once that would follow him around.  Pigs
>>> are more intelligent (and more trainable ---- two separate metrics) 
than
>>> dogs.  The pig basically bonded to the man and vice versa.  When the 
pig
>>> got big enough, with a tear in his eye he had it slaughtered.
>>>
>>> That didn't make any sense for him to do that then and it should as 
fuck
>>> doesn't make any more sense to me now.  Calling that "reality" is just 
as
>>> wrong as can be.
>> 
>> What?  Where do you think food comes from?   Is it only fitting to
>> slaughter animals for food if we foster a deep hatred for them or
>> something?  Why cant farmers care for them?  (as most all do in their 
own
>> way)
>
>It makes no sense if the food is not needed.  Normal people do not eat 
pets
>except as a last resort.  

Once upon a time, normal people wouldn't waste precious nutritional
resources on a pet.

>Read the post above again: the man bonded with
>that pig to the extent that slaughtering it brought him tears.  It clearly
>made him sad to kill it.  Unless he needed that meat right then, it would
>have made him happier to keep it alive--he could always slaughter it next
>week or month or year.

The story didn't say what was done with the meat.  Delay is rarely
an option.  The older an animal gets, the tougher the meat.


/BAH


Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Noah Roberts wrote:
> Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
>
>> You can disagree with me concerning whether or not what my
>> grandfather did was a bad thing.  That's fine.  There are others
>> here who disagree as well.  But don't try to oversimplify the issue
>> by saying that I shouldn't eat meat.  That's a clearly unwarranted
>> extrapolation.
>>
>>
>
> No it isn't.  You are being hypocritical.  It is ok to kill an animal
> for food so long as you don't feel bad doing it.  It makes me sick.
> You are deminishing the gift you are given by the animal that has
> died.  You don't deserve to eat its flesh.

Again you miss his point.  I'm guessing it is intentional.

Slainte,
Fletch

Rob Duncan wrote:
> "Thomas G. Marshall" <
>
>>> You obviously know *nothing* about modern swine.  Do you have *any*
>>> idea how HUGE they become?
>>
>> Some can certainly become enormous.  But so what?
>>
>> HE.  LIVED.  ON.  A.  FARM!
>
> Because he was a farmer do you assume that he is so dumb as to want a
> 900 lb animal following him around all the time?  Imagine the trouble
> that could possibly create.  Modern pigs *have to be butchered.  They
> are breed to grow to immense proportions in as short a time as
> possible.
>
> Saying all this... I like pigs.  I think theyre real smart, theyre
> lovey-dovey, trainable, they have charactor, theyre fun.  But a
> modern pig, of the type were talking about, can not exist as a pet.
> At least not comfortably.
>
> I think people confuse pigs with these teeny-tiny pigs we always see
> on tv and in the movies.  Real pigs become ENOURMOUS.  HUGE.
> GIGANTIC.  Really, im not kidding.  The poor guy probably couldnt
> even come indoors anymore.
>
> I went to a deer farm once. The guy loved these obviously tender and
> caring animals.  Lots of fun antics in the fawns.  But they too were
> all bound for the butcher block.  And this guy loved them all.  To
> death.  >oops!< Imagine, feeling guilty because one needs to eat.  LOL

I hope you never get stranded with your family without food.  "Imagine,
feeling guilty..." :)

Slainte,
Fletch

Mike Kent wrote:
>> Got a good suggestion for a free newsreader?  By no means am I
>> wedded to Microsoft, using OE just required no time.
>
> If you want News/Mail/Browsing, Mozilla/Netscape.  For News/Mail
> separate from browsing, Mozilla Thunderbird.  They work under non-MS
> operating systems too ...

Thank you all for your suggestions.

Slainte,
Fletch

Mike Kent <mkent@acm.org> coughed up the following:

> Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
>> Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:
>>
>>
>>> "Thomas G. Marshall"
> ...
>  >>> it's the killing of
>>>> an animal even though you bonded to it and it to you.  THAT'S the
>>>> issue.
>>>
>>> So bonding, a combined result of cortisols effects and emotional
>>> attachment, is sound basis for forming a moral stance?  Bonding...
>>> makes the act immoral?  Im not arguing against the point, Im asking
>>> if thats what you meant.
>>
>>
>> Not exactly, but almost.
>>
>> When you bond with an animal, especially one as intelligent as a pig,
>> you are setting up a relationship with that animal.  It learns to
>> /trust/ you.
>>
>> It would follow him around because it trusted him.  That trust gets
>> violated in the end.
>
> OT for all these NGs, should be in foo.ethics ... oh well.
>
> Many animals certainly seem to feel pain

When you deal with AI and AL long enough, you realize that just the
"seeming" to feel pain, that is having all reactions and effects of
pain, *IS* pain.


> and to experience
> some emotions -- fear certainly -- but "trust" is something
> that I would not attribute to a pig.  /Maybe/ some of the
> other social primates (and /maybe/ dogs, after a few thousand
> generations of close association with and selection by humans).
> Unless you mean by trust only that the animal does not see you
> as a threat ... in which case we'd best outlaw duck blinds and
> other hunting stratagems, and most of the practices of humane
> slaughter.

You're confusing trust with being unaware.


> I don't see that anthropomorphizing animals is a reliable
> guide to their ethical treatment.

I don't see that taking merely what you can prove to be the guide when
dealing with what is at heart an emotional issue.  And the term
"anthropomorphizing" as you are using it is not a static quantity, but a
sliding scale with many shades of gray.



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> coughed up the following:

> In article <XMudnQ5sI4cZBQjdRVn-gg@scnresearch.com>, Noah Roberts
> wrote:
>> Clearly you are not a farmer.  Or if you are, not a very good one.
>> If it bothers you so much become a vegetarian.
>
> Most farmers don't cry when they kill their animals.  They may care
> for their food animals, but they do not treat them as pets.  When an
> animal becomes a pet, it is not rational to kill it, just because it
> happens to be the same species as some of the food animals.


*CORRECT*.

-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

Rob Duncan <robduncan@gbronline.com> coughed up the following:

....[rip]...

>>> I can tell, that you are young.  Someday, when you have the time,
>>> investigate some Native American religions.  Indeed, people can
>>> *love and *care for the very thing they one day intend on eating.
>>> To
>>> presume a small farmer doesnt become attached to his small herd of
>>> cattle is incorrect.
>>>
>>> In farming communities high school students raise from birth cattle,
>>> swine, etc., who will be sold at auction after being shown at the
>>> fair.  These students are *very attached to their charges, and they
>>> know they are being sold to be eaten.  They dont have any problems
>>> spending the money they get either.  Its life.  Its reality.
>
>> That means that they are simply not getting attached enough to save
>> the animal's life.  And I cannot understand how the level of
>> attachment can be so low in my grandfather's case when he clearly
>> was crying about it being slaughtered.
>
> You simply live in a different emotional world than others do.
> Others defer to reality.  I would suggest refraining from making
> moral judgements based on your individual inability to understand
> others behavior.  (especially considering that their behavior is
> perfectly normal.)
>
>> There's a fundamental dichotomy in that.  You don't kill an animal
>> that you love just because it's a pig and that's what you "supposed
>> to do" to pigs.
>
> On the contrary.  Thats exactly what is done.   Whats that book about
> a kid who befriends a deer?  His dad has real bad arthritis?  The
> deer breaks into, and eats, many times, part of their sparce crops?
> Its killing me. The Yearling?... no, something like that though.
> IRL I bet you are a very kind and non-confrontational person.  But if
> your livelyhood was farming/ranching youde learn to deal with these
> emotions in a different way than you do now.  You can feel sad
> without feeling guilty.

....[thwack]...

What is all this?  Your assessment of me personally as if it furthers
your argument?

And I have to laugh.  So far you have said

    RobDuncan> "I can tell that you're young."

I am 39.  So you're assessment is wrong.  Especially the way that this
implies that I'm too young to somehow have understood the reality of
life.

    RobDuncan> "IRL I bet you are very kind......and non-confrontational
person."

You can GOT TO STOP LABELING PEOPLE AS IF YOU KNOW, even /if/ you meant
that as a compliment.  But your mentioning that is more likely a known
arguing technique: you are trying to dismiss my position with a label.

You haven't a clue about me personally----and if any of my friends are
reading this right now they are laughing.  I am extremely kind to
animals---I have dogs and cats, the cats were rescued, and I until
recently spent 14 months volunteering at a no-kill animal shelter.  The
past 2 months I was working 3 hours a day (!) with a dog that was
dangerous, trying to get her over whatever made her go berserk in
certain situations, and now she has a loving family.  I am /very/ kind,
but not to people.  There, I've been called "fair" and "helpful to
others" but an "angry" "dangerous" person when wronged.  That is much to
my dismay.  I've also been called a "teddy bear" but with the caveat
that "you better not threaten him".  The dark sides probably come from
childhood, but who knows or cares.



-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

TMG <TMG@Nowhere.org> coughed up the following:

....[slash]...



> Yes - That's the short story cut as originally published in "Analog in
> '77" . How many of the current readers read the original (vintage?)
> "Analog" - for some here, it was a core driver - science and
> adventure.
>
> I was really referring to the "full" novel version from about 10 years
> ago. Spawned a series of uneven quality.

I believe Dune to be the best book ever written, at least in my eyes.
But his subsequent books were horrible.

It's sad when you can see the obvious talent in an author die on the
vine, or get watered down on the conveyor belt.


-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

> Most farmers don't cry when they kill their animals.  They may care for
> their food animals, but they do not treat them as pets.  When an animal
> becomes a pet, it is not rational to kill it, just because it happens to
be
> the same species as some of the food animals.
>
I can speak to "farmers" in general.   But I once met a woman who raised and
sold rabbits for FOOD.   She didn't make the "bunnies" into pets.   But her
main doe (mamma rabbit) was as close to being a pet as a rabbit could be.

I remember her holding this rather large rabbit in her arms while she
speculated on when her (the rabbits) "production" would go down and she (the
"farmer') would turn the pet into rabbit stew.

Rabbits:  the pet you can eat.

Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
> Mike Kent <mkent@acm.org> coughed up the following:
....
>>OT for all these NGs, should be in foo.ethics ... oh well.
>>
>>Many animals certainly seem to feel pain
> 
> 
> When you deal with AI and AL long enough, you realize that just the
> "seeming" to feel pain, that is having all reactions and effects of
> pain, *IS* pain.

I thought that's what I was saying:  the animal acts in away that
suggests strongly to human observers that it's in pain, so it's
a good guess that it's experiencing pain, pretty much as you or I
might.

>>and to experience
>>some emotions -- fear certainly -- but "trust" is something
>>that I would not attribute to a pig.  /Maybe/ some of the
>>other social primates (and /maybe/ dogs, after a few thousand
>>generations of close association with and selection by humans).
>>Unless you mean by trust only that the animal does not see you
>>as a threat ... in which case we'd best outlaw duck blinds and
>>other hunting stratagems, and most of the practices of humane
>>slaughter.
> 
> 
> You're confusing trust with being unaware.

Well, actually, I carefully distinguished between them -- that's
why I wrote "Unless you mean ...".  I happen to think that what
I mean by trust requires mental powers and states that pigs do
not have.

>>I don't see that anthropomorphizing animals is a reliable
>>guide to their ethical treatment.
> 
> 
> I don't see that taking merely what you can prove to be the guide when
> dealing with what is at heart an emotional issue.

As an emotional issue everyone gets to be comfortable with whatever
they're comfortable with, and I'm not qualified to counsel about the
matter.  I thought the discussion concerned ethics and my point was
that animals aren't people, and that it pays to be careful how much
similarity we assume.

In any case, IMO it's reasonable to err somewhat on the side of
not harming or causing pain; there are slippery slopes here to
cruelty on one side, and to a senseless priggishness on the other.


 > And the term
> "anthropomorphizing" as you are using it is not a static quantity, but a
> sliding scale with many shades of gray.

I would say that killing a pet for food absent dire need is a
bad act, precisely because /what it means to have a pet/ is to
anthropomorphize an animal in ways that entail an assumption of
obligation.  Farm families don't ordinarily assume that stance
towards livestock animals; their sentiment for a specific animal
is conditioned by the knowledge that it will end up as food.

In article <Mxskc.17$dR2.9123@news.uswest.net>,
   "Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote:
>
><jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:4092468d$0$28934$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
>> In article <40922485.B295B3AF@yahoo.com>,
>>    CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Dave Rusin wrote:
>> >> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 
120s.
>> >>
>> >> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I
>> >> mean, is there really a reputable group of psychologists around
>> >> which still puts any faith in these quaint measures of some
>> >> absolute sort of "intelligence"? (And don't they lose any shred
>> >> of professionalism by sharing this number with impressionable
>> >> children who think it says something important about them?)
>> >
>> >Probably the same place we oldsters got 'em.  65 years or so ago
>> >they were given in the school class room, and the results
>> >publicized to the individual at least.
>>
>> Nope.  The kid didn't get to know.
>
>Unless the parents told them. 

Nope.  It was a Bad Thing, not to be talked about.

> .. However, once you turn 18 you can obtain the
>information.

Maybe in your day and age.  Not mine.

> ..  Out of curiosity I had a look at my school records from 1st
>grade (only grade of school I made it through).  Other than the fact I was 
a
>shit toward my teachers, the only interesting thing was the IQ tests, and
>the results due to the political climate at the time.  The resulting grade
>skipping, and subsequent torture by kids several years my senior probably
>left scars. 

Yup.  That's why my Dad refused to let me skip a grade.  He skipped
a grade and became an emotional mess.  Cause-effect.

> .. However, the trauma of the rest of my youth made up for it.  If
>your tooth hurts... smash your toe with a hammer and the toothache will go
>away.

As TW used to say, "Life sucks and then you die."  I stayed in
school because my parents were law-abiding and would never think
to defy authority and break the rules.  I learned how to break
them on my own; it took me a long time to learn :-)).  The key
is learning which ones to break.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

On Mon, 03 May 2004 19:40:23 -0400, John Gilmer wrote:

> 
> 
>> Most farmers don't cry when they kill their animals.  They may care for
>> their food animals, but they do not treat them as pets.  When an animal
>> becomes a pet, it is not rational to kill it, just because it happens to
> be
>> the same species as some of the food animals.
>>
> I can speak to "farmers" in general.   But I once met a woman who raised and
> sold rabbits for FOOD.   She didn't make the "bunnies" into pets.   But her
> main doe (mamma rabbit) was as close to being a pet as a rabbit could be.
> 
> I remember her holding this rather large rabbit in her arms while she
> speculated on when her (the rabbits) "production" would go down and she (the
> "farmer') would turn the pet into rabbit stew.
> 
> Rabbits:  the pet you can eat.

Also pigs, cattle, etc. Farmers can be quite practical, and I've
personally known some who had "pets" of the same species as their
livestock, and eventually ate them.

On Sat, 01 May 2004 13:04:52 +0000, Gistak wrote:

> On 5/1/04 12:22 AM, in article
> 7ce4e226.0404302022.25a9c2cc@posting.google.com, "Harry Conover"
> <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
>> news:<c6u30a$a3o$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
>> 
>>> When people want to be a vet because of a deep love of animals, they
>>> usually seem to have pets like cats and dogs in mind.  I don't know how
>>> you read so much about my own opinions about farm animals from that.
>> 
>> Evidently then you have a very bizarre idea of what vets actually do,
>> likely a result of having always lived in an urban venue where
>> "animals" to you largely consist of dogs and cats.
>> 
>> Except in a city, the vast majority of vets focus their attention on
>> the health of farm livestock like steers, dairy herds, swine, poultry,
>> and sometimes even horses. The vet's function is to keep these animals
>> healthy and productive until they age to the point of going to market.
>> 
>> Of course they love animals, and working with animals to maintain the
>> animal's health. The fact that the animal was produced for the sole
>> purposes of producing a food product or going to market isn't an
>> issue.
>> 
>> I suspect, as do many city dweller, you're confusing domestic pets
>> with livestock, something no rural dweller ever does. Farmers do not
>> keep livestock for pets, and don't ever confuse their pets (dogs,
>> cats, etc.) with their livestock. Neither do vets.
>> 
>>                                                     Harry C.
> 
> This sounds like a call for "JAMES HERRIOT!"
> 
> As a kid, I read all his books. Great stuff and I highly recommend them.

Since I'm piggybacking on your post, I'll go ahead and agree. Stuff like
the war veteran getting the gassy dog are hilarious.

As to the above about pets vs. livestock, Harry is incorrect. While he may
not know farmers who "confuse" pets with livestock, there certainly are
such. Some farmers make pets of specific pigs, cattle, chickens, etc.
while dealing with the rest only as livestock. These pets may eventually
be killed and eaten, but they are, in the meantime, pets. Also, it is a
mistake to confuse "farmer" with "rural dweller", as many rural people
are not in any sense farmers, and have attitudes toward animals that
resemble the attitudes of city or suburb folks more than those of farmers.

Mike Kent <mkent@acm.org> coughed up the following:

> Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
>> Mike Kent <mkent@acm.org> coughed up the following:
> ...
>>> OT for all these NGs, should be in foo.ethics ... oh well.
>>>
>>> Many animals certainly seem to feel pain
>>
>>
>> When you deal with AI and AL long enough, you realize that just the
>> "seeming" to feel pain, that is having all reactions and effects of
>> pain, *IS* pain.
>
> I thought that's what I was saying:  the animal acts in away that
> suggests strongly to human observers that it's in pain, so it's
> a good guess that it's experiencing pain, pretty much as you or I
> might.

Sure, ok, but it doesn't go far enough.  Your statements says "if it's
in pain, then it's in pain," but I'm splitting hairs I suppose.


>
>>> and to experience
>>> some emotions -- fear certainly -- but "trust" is something
>>> that I would not attribute to a pig.  /Maybe/ some of the
>>> other social primates (and /maybe/ dogs, after a few thousand
>>> generations of close association with and selection by humans).
>>> Unless you mean by trust only that the animal does not see you
>>> as a threat ... in which case we'd best outlaw duck blinds and
>>> other hunting stratagems, and most of the practices of humane
>>> slaughter.
>>
>>
>> You're confusing trust with being unaware.
>
> Well, actually, I carefully distinguished between them -- that's
> why I wrote "Unless you mean ...".  I happen to think that what
> I mean by trust requires mental powers and states that pigs do
> not have.

No, you've STILL got it wrong.  I was saying that having an animal that
doesn't see you as a threat IS a level of trust.

And duck blinds and the like does not counter that at all because it is
"being unaware", not "being aware and not worried."

But even THAT isn't enough, since the pig was quite attached to my
grandfather, and vice-versa.

Take a look by the way at what pigs are really like:

    A tree hugging, but NTL interesting story about pigs being smarter
and cleaner than dogs:
    http://www.relfe.com/pigs.html
    -------------------------------------
    PBS's nature program on the subject:
    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/pigs/smart.html
    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/pigs/pets.html
    -------------------------------------
    "On the human intelligence scale, pigs are third removed from
    humans, while dogs are 13th removed. Only primates and
    dolphins are smarter than pigs. Pigs can learn on a lateral
    level, while dogs cannot, which means a pig can learn something
    in one situation and apply it to another"
    http://www.pigspeace.org/faq.html


-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

On 30 Apr 2004 05:14:53 GMT, Dave Rusin <rusin@vesuvius.math.niu.edu> wrote:
> In article <f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com>,
> Ender <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote:
> 
>>I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
> 
> Where the heck do you youngsters get these "IQs" from, anyway? I mean,
> is there really a reputable group of psychologists around which still
> puts any faith in these quaint measures of some absolute sort of
> "intelligence"?

Yes, there are, because professionally administered and calibrated
tests have repeatedly and consistently repeated *some* useful
information.

>  (And don't they lose any shred of professionalism
> by sharing this number with impressionable children who think it
> says something important about them?)

Certainly. 

> OP: I am far, far removed from being 14. I can assure you that when
> I am working with students in their teens and 20s, I never ask about
> "IQ", and if told about it would (at best) snigger inwardly and
> say, "that's nice". It is much, much more interesting to me to hear
> about your science-fair project, your volunteer activities, and of
> course what you've learned in school (NOT your grades). Put the label 
> aside and use the talents you think you have to do something 
> interesting and useful.

Right, that's what high-IQ people realize. 

> 
> dave

Gregory L. Hansen <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> Sounds like some of the woo-woos on sci.physics.  A reasonably 
> representative composite would be that a programmer or mechanic has found 
> a simple and obvious flaw in special relativity.  It's gone unnoticed for 
> a hundred years because of the brainwashing and desparation for peer 
> acceptance in the educational and scientific institutes, and because 
> scientists don't do any real-world things like fixing cars or throwing 
> balls.  Practicing scientists have nothing to teach them for the same 
> reasons, and you can't trust the establishment anyway because they laughed 
> at Galileo and said rocks don't fall from the sky.  They're insensitive to 
> criticisms of their own theory; the critics just don't understand it.  And 
> the thread degenerates into a circular orgy of harsh language, and 
> eventually the woo-woo will die without a single reference in the 
> peer-reviewed scientific literature.  I have no idea what their IQs are.

Their IQ's are reasonably high.

It's their EQ's which are in the sub-moron.  ('emotional intelligence') 

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 22:31:38 GMT, karen <nothing@nospam.com> wrote:
> 
> "Ender" <ender@guiltyspark.org> wrote in message
> news:f7c852c5.0404291909.141e721d@posting.google.com...
>> Hey,
>> I am 14 and a freshman in highschool. Like you, my IQ is in the 120s.
><snip>
> 
> Intelligence is where you start.  Knowledge is what you add.  Wisdom is what
> you do with it.  
 

  "good judgement comes from experience.  experience comes from bad judgement."
		--- supposedly Mark Twain 


A person who starts off with a low or average intelligence,
> learns a lot, and learns to apply that knowledge, will be much farther along
> than a person who starts off with a high intelligence, learns some, and
> continues to make foolish decisions.  Wisdom is the goal.
> 
> When I was in high school, I thought I was smart because I got good grades
> and had a reasonably high IQ.  I eventually learned that both of those are
> immaterial.  After you graduate from college, no-one cares what your grades
> were, and they care even less what your IQ might be.  They care if you can
> do the job, if you have a good attitude, if you can learn what you need to
> learn, if you can get along with your co-workers.  Some of that is
> knowledge, some of that is wisdom.  I'm still working on both.  The more you
> know, the more you know that you don't know.

People with higher IQ's tend to realize that faster. 

> -karen

In article <a0ec6a9c.0405120229.58cb9465@posting.google.com>,
   wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote:
>jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote in message 
news:<4094fdd1$0$3048$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
>> In article <a0ec6a9c.0405010903.24ae2975@posting.google.com>,
>>    wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote:
>> >"Thomas G. Marshall" 
>> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message 
>> news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
>> >> I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
>> >> 
>> >> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
>> >> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
>> >> just begging for one of two things to happen:
>> >> 
>> >> 1. A false sense of superiority
>> >> or
>> >> 2. A false sense of inferiority
>> >> 
>> >> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
>> >
>> >It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
>> >condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
>> >problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
>> >from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
>> >took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
>> >184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
>> >test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
>> >qualitative factor "Precision Processor".
>> 
>> Bullshit detector alert!!!
>> 
>> >
>> >(BTW, I'm 13)
>> 
>> It sure sounds like a joke test.  Precision processor?  And mental
>> profile?
>Well, it was Emode's.  If I'm not mistaken, it was made by pHD's(sorry
>if that's capitalized wrong)

I spell it PhD (mine is also an incorrect spelling).

>
>And it wasn't really a 'profile'.  That was emode's name.  More like a
>qualitative analysis of the test results.

No, no.  I wouldn't call it _qual_itative.  There's no quality
in it.

<snip "spank me" comment>

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

In article <a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com>,
   wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote:
>ZZBunker wrote:
><snip>
>>   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
>>   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
>>   throwback who believes sets exist.
>
>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! 

A good way to get people to yell at you and treat you like a
child is to plead diminished capacity.

<snip>

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote in message news:<4094fdd1$0$3048$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
> In article <a0ec6a9c.0405010903.24ae2975@posting.google.com>,
>    wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote:
> >"Thomas G. Marshall" 
> <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:<gfvkc.7283$wY.6491@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>...
> >> I totally agree and always have.  IQ's are a horrendously bad idea.
> >> 
> >> I am having my first child {panic attack} in August, a boy.  He will
> >> /never/ take one of those tests, I don't care HOW gifted he is.  It's
> >> just begging for one of two things to happen:
> >> 
> >> 1. A false sense of superiority
> >> or
> >> 2. A false sense of inferiority
> >> 
> >> Either of which is a disaster to a growing child.
> >
> >It's not the IQ/Gifted tests that make the kid get condition 1 or
> >condition 2, it's actual being gifted and how he understands the
> >problems in school. And my sense of mathematical superiority comes
> >from actually being extremely good at math, not taking an AG test.  I
> >took 2 online IQ tests(neither one from iqtest.com) and on one i got
> >184, on the other I got in the 120s.  The most valuable part of either
> >test is the second one's giving me a "Mental Profile" with the
> >qualitative factor "Precision Processor".
> 
> Bullshit detector alert!!!
> 
> >
> >(BTW, I'm 13)
> 
> It sure sounds like a joke test.  Precision processor?  And mental
> profile?
Well, it was Emode's.  If I'm not mistaken, it was made by pHD's(sorry
if that's capitalized wrong)

And it wasn't really a 'profile'.  That was emode's name.  More like a
qualitative analysis of the test results.

Oh, and, anybody thinking that I'm stupid can give me the Fourier
series for the Weierstrass p-function with *periods*(not half-periods)
1 and tau(in the upper half plane).  You can use x=exp(2*pi*i*tau).

It should converge in the region {0<Im(z)<Im(tau)}.

ZZBunker wrote:
<snip>
>   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
>   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
>   throwback who believes sets exist.

If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
about the Weierstrass p-function...

And how do you infer "religious throwback" from "unemployed"?  You
don't.

And give me a proof that sets don't exist.

"William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...
> ZZBunker wrote:
> <snip>
> >   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
> >   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
> >   throwback who believes sets exist.
>
> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly

Arrogance?

wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote in message news:<a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com>...
> ZZBunker wrote:
> <snip>
> >   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
> >   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
> >   throwback who believes sets exist.
> 
> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> about the Weierstrass p-function...
> 
> And how do you infer "religious throwback" from "unemployed"?  You
> don't.
> 
> And give me a proof that sets don't exist.

  Since proving sets don't exist is an as simple
  as proving that Russell was a religous 
  throwback to the mideval European druid
  ante-religous-religous philosophers of the Kant-Cantor 
  category, it is quite simple.

William S wrote:

> ZZBunker wrote:
> <snip>
> 
>>  So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
>>  who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
>>  throwback who believes sets exist.
> 
> 
> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> about the Weierstrass p-function...

   Whoop-de-do. Math isn't a science.

> And how do you infer "religious throwback" from "unemployed"?  You
> don't.

   Because of his later usage of "believes"...

> And give me a proof that sets don't exist.

   You ask for a negative proof? Silly child. Please prove 
that sets _do_ exist.

   Mark L. Fergerson

"William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...

[snip]

> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> about the Weierstrass p-function...

At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
mother about it.

Franz

Franz Heymann wrote:

> "William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...

> [snip]

>>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
>>frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
>>about the Weierstrass p-function...

> At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
> mother about it.

You're a classic troll, Franz, who even picks on children.

Bill Vajk wrote:
> 
> Franz Heymann wrote:
> 
> > "William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...
> 
> > [snip]
> 
> >>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> >>frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> >>about the Weierstrass p-function...
> 
> > At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
> > mother about it.
> 
> You're a classic troll, Franz, who even picks on children.

Grow up, Vakjk, and stop whining.

-- 
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"  The Net!

Knuckledragger pouts:

> Bill Vajk wrote:

>>Franz Heymann wrote:

>>>"William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...

>>>[snip]

>>>>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
>>>>frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
>>>>about the Weierstrass p-function...

>>>At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
>>>mother about it.

>>You're a classic troll, Franz, who even picks on children.

> Grow up, Vakjk, and stop whining.

Funny, *anything* about growing up coming from you, Schwartz.
Tell us, where was it you took Peter Pan lessons? Believe me
when I say that they took very well indeed.

Where's your peer reviewed submittal about your experiment, Al?

Or does "collaboration" mean that some sensible and organized
grad student writes the article and your name gets insignificantly
pasted to it? LOL

Franz is a garden variety troll who occasionally actually
posts something worth reading. But to wade through all his
crap is far too much overhead considering the little bit of
a return one might eventually achieve.

"Bill Vajk" <bill9north@hotmailDITCHTHIS.com> wrote in message
news:eO2dnQ_BYuAkDD_dRVn-vA@comcast.com...
> Franz Heymann wrote:
>
> > "William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...
>
> > [snip]
>
> >>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> >>frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> >>about the Weierstrass p-function...
>
> > At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
> > mother about it.
>
> You're a classic troll, Franz, who even picks on children.

Come now Vajk, think for yourself.  If Penny had not defended the kid, you
would be first in line berating him and showing the world again how much of
an obnoxious twit you are.

"Bill Vajk" <bill9north@hotmailDITCHTHIS.com> wrote in message
news:hK6dnekx36TNBj_dRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
> Knuckledragger pouts:
>
> > Bill Vajk wrote:
>
> >>Franz Heymann wrote:
>
> >>>"William S" <wschliep@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com...
>
> >>>[snip]
>
> >>>>If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> >>>>frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> >>>>about the Weierstrass p-function...
>
> >>>At thirteen, you ought to have been weaned.  Have a word with your
> >>>mother about it.
>
> >>You're a classic troll, Franz, who even picks on children.
>
> > Grow up, Vakjk, and stop whining.
>
> Funny, *anything* about growing up coming from you, Schwartz.
> Tell us, where was it you took Peter Pan lessons? Believe me
> when I say that they took very well indeed.
>
> Where's your peer reviewed submittal about your experiment, Al?

http://www.aps.org/meet/APR04/baps/abs/S690006.html

Jackass.

>
> Or does "collaboration" mean that some sensible and organized
> grad student writes the article and your name gets insignificantly
> pasted to it? LOL

You really are a bitter old fool, aren't you Vajk?  Penny must have great
strength of character to continue calling you a friend.

> Franz is a garden variety troll who occasionally actually
> posts something worth reading. But to wade through all his
> crap is far too much overhead considering the little bit of
> a return one might eventually achieve.

Quit projecting, Vajk.

William S <wschliep@earthlink.net> coughed up the following:

> ZZBunker wrote:
> <snip>
>>   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
>>   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
>>   throwback who believes sets exist.
>
> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> about the Weierstrass p-function...


This is a feeble attempt at a terrible arguing technique.  It is an
attempt to:

1. place yourself in the upper echelon of human kind by bragging about
how much you actually know given your age.

and

2. make it easy on yourself by providing an excuse if you were proven
dead wrong on something.  As if we're to say "it's ok, he's only 13, and
for that age WOW is he bright."


William, careful.  We're not the kids down the street trying to smoke
weed.

You in the company of heavy hitters here.  And unless you wish to be
utterly embarrassed, keep statements like "I am frighteningly good at
math..." out of your dialog.


....[rip]...


-- 
While using is ok, actually /writing/ free software is a disingenuous
activity.  You can afford to write software for free only because of
someone else somewhere actually paying for it.  Just say no.

"ZZBunker" <zzbunker@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:e4a0829b.0405120854.1aba5d95@posting.google.com...
> wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote in message
news:<a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com>...
> > ZZBunker wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
> > >   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
> > >   throwback who believes sets exist.
> >
> > If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> > frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> > about the Weierstrass p-function...
> >
> > And how do you infer "religious throwback" from "unemployed"?  You
> > don't.
> >
> > And give me a proof that sets don't exist.
>
>   Since proving sets don't exist is an as simple
>   as proving that Russell was a religous
>   throwback to the mideval European druid
>   ante-religous-religous philosophers of the Kant-Cantor
>   category, it is quite simple.

Care to try?


Rob

On 12 May 2004, William S wrote:

> If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> about the Weierstrass p-function...

  Even if you were 13, *knowing* a lot of math does not make you *good* at 
math. If you were truly good at math, people would know about you.
  The difference between people who know a lot of math and those who do it 
well is similar to the baseball commentators or the football coaches who 
know an awful lot about the game and maybe know it better than the players 
themselves, but they couldn't hit a ball or make a tackle if their life 
depended on it.

J

"Rob Duncan" <robduncan@gbronline.com> wrote in message news:<6NidnS1OKtlTIj_dRVn-iQ@gbronline.com>...
> "ZZBunker" <zzbunker@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:e4a0829b.0405120854.1aba5d95@posting.google.com...
> > wschliep@earthlink.net (William S) wrote in message
>  news:<a0ec6a9c.0405120234.7e8452be@posting.google.com>...
> > > ZZBunker wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > >   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
> > > >   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
> > > >   throwback who believes sets exist.
> > >
> > > If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> > > frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> > > about the Weierstrass p-function...
> > >
> > > And how do you infer "religious throwback" from "unemployed"?  You
> > > don't.
> > >
> > > And give me a proof that sets don't exist.
> >
> >   Since proving sets don't exist is an as simple
> >   as proving that Russell was a religous
> >   throwback to the mideval European druid
> >   ante-religous-religous philosophers of the Kant-Cantor
> >   category, it is quite simple.
> 
> Care to try?

  Russel did it himself, it does have to be reproven.
  Kant simply did not what all philosophers
  have since the days of Zeno.
  Not only can't they not count, but 
  as hard as it is to believe, they're
  even more igorant than French philosophers.




> 
> 
> Rob

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<M4yoc.33065$L8.14100@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>...
> William S <wschliep@earthlink.net> coughed up the following:
> 
> > ZZBunker wrote:
> > <snip>
> >>   So the mental profile of a mathematcian is somebody who
> >>   who is not only unemployed, but an umemployed religous
> >>   throwback who believes sets exist.
> >
> > If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> > frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> > about the Weierstrass p-function...
> 
> 
> This is a feeble attempt at a terrible arguing technique.  It is an
> attempt to:
> 
> 1. place yourself in the upper echelon of human kind by bragging about
> how much you actually know given your age.
> 
> and
> 
> 2. make it easy on yourself by providing an excuse if you were proven
> dead wrong on something.  As if we're to say "it's ok, he's only 13, and
> for that age WOW is he bright."
> 

I figured he meant that being in middle school isn't QUITE the same as
being unemployed.

P

"Jim Nastos" <nastos@cs.ualberta.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0405122320150.28600-100000@tees.cs.ualberta.ca...
> On 12 May 2004, William S wrote:
>
> > If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> > frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> > about the Weierstrass p-function...
>
>   Even if you were 13, *knowing* a lot of math does not make you *good* at
> math. If you were truly good at math, people would know about you.

Why?  Is there a nocturnal bot that looks for math prodigies?

One time in the Netherlands, when I was traveling on the cheap,
I stayed in this pension.  Went to the bathroom in the middle of the
night, and leaving the bathroom, took a wrong turn.  The
other half of the hallway was exactly like my half and I
went to what should be my door, saw the light was on
underneath the door, and finding it unlocked, walked
into someone else's room.

A guy was sitting there in a wing chair that I didn't
have in my room.  He put his finger to his lips and
said in English, "Shhh. I'm trying to find out where
the geniuses are.  Shhh."  Sounded very
conspiratorial.  I left in a hurry, and never did find
out how he did.

On Thu, 13 May 2004, JimC wrote:

> "Jim Nastos" <nastos@cs.ualberta.ca> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0405122320150.28600-100000@tees.cs.ualberta.ca...
> > On 12 May 2004, William S wrote:
> >
> > > If you don't recall, I'm THIRTEEN! I'M IN MIDDLE SCHOOL! But I am
> > > frighteningly good at math... And by frighteningly, check my post
> > > about the Weierstrass p-function...
> >
> >   Even if you were 13, *knowing* a lot of math does not make you *good* at
> > math. If you were truly good at math, people would know about you.
> 
> Why?  Is there a nocturnal bot that looks for math prodigies?

  No, but is someone is "frighteningly good" at math, that person would be 
winning prizes or contests or whatnot. It's not uncommon for a young 
student (maybe a bit older than a 13 year old) to compete in the 
international math olympiad, and just competing at that age would be big 
news I would be familiar with. (If someone says that 13 is too young to 
compete at the IMO, the counter-statement is that a 13 year old is too 
young to discuss Weierstrass p-functions.)
  So, if the 13 year old is still reading this and still claiming his 
frightfully good math skills, maybe he could enlighten us on his 
accomplishments to back up that statement. Without them, we can just 
assume he knows a lot of math and isn't necessarily good at it.

> A guy was sitting there in a wing chair that I didn't
> have in my room.  He put his finger to his lips and
> said in English, "Shhh. I'm trying to find out where
> the geniuses are.  Shhh."  Sounded very
> conspiratorial.  I left in a hurry, and never did find
> out how he did.

  That's an interesting story.

J