Subject: Re: NEXT WINDOW SEPT.11TH, 1996
From: Dr.Turi@worldnet.att.net (drturi)
Date: 11 Sep 1996 06:11:51 GMT
In article <325b13f9.58110421@news.accucomm.net>, puddin@ask.again.com
says...
>
>On 8 Sep 1996 09:44:08 GMT, Dr.Turi@worldnet.att.net (drturi) wrote:
>>
>>Dear Sir, I do not only predict earthquakes but also fires! Free
>>astropsychology---
>
>I suppose that you do great card tricks, too.
>What's that? Are you quacking again?
HOW DO YOU FEEL NOW? You could at least wait for the results!! You've got a
long way to go. "and the eternity to get there :)
>
In article <515k4a$lf5@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Dr.Turi@worldnet.att.net says...
>
>
>>
>>Incorrect -- he's a businessman (albeit a very annoying one) trying
>to
>>sell a product. His best chance to sell his product is for a neophyte
>to
>>read his uncontested posts and decide that he (Turi) is onto
>something. I
>>am grateful for the debunkers in this world and wish there were a lot
>more
>>of them.
>>
>>Michael Williams t/$=1
>>Arroyo Grande, CA
>
>Got a lot to learn!!!! and eternity to do so :-)
>Path:
netnews.worldnet.att.net!hunter.premier.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.prime
net.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!portc01.blue.aol.com!newstf01.news.ao
l.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: moanare2@aol.com (Moana Re 2)
Newsgroups: alt.paranet.ufo
Subject: Dr Turi's predictions
Date: 10 Sep 1996 23:05:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 3
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <515aan$6a6@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: moanare2@aol.com (Moana Re 2)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Well, today is 9/11 in Japan........Tokyo has a 6.6 earthquake, centered
in the Pacific.....with a Tsunanmi warning. You were at least on the
right side of the world on this.
>I'll be gone to a conference in Austin TX - 4.30AM :( I wont be
>able to
>answer some of your silly notes thus don't be mad at me I have to make
>a
>(very good) living. Watch my window and the unfolding drama (as
>usual).
>
>On the window of Sept. 17th many will get a wake up call, but noting
>like
>the window of Sept. 29th where you will see the real power behind my
>work.
>
>Just be patient and all the pin heads out there spare me with your
>frustration (based upon your ignorance). The window of Sept. 22nd
>will see
>a lot of disturbance/explosions/volcanoe eruption? and surprising news
>for
>many of you. The past is coming alive with people you have not seen
>for a
>long time will call you or surprise you. Take care of your car it
>might let
>you down now and dont be mad at "Kinkos" if their equipments let you
>down.
>Avoid travelling you may get stuck in an airport with flights
>CANCELATIONS.
>
>You can expect to have problem with "any and all" of your electronic
>equipment too.
>
>The worse that could really happen to us is a virus!!!!!!!!! NASA of
>course
>as usual will waste your tax dollar with "electronic mulfunction" or
>waste millions of dollars with another lost of an expansive satellite,
>they
>may also pospond the lift up of the shuttle because of bad weather-
>(its
>only $500.000 each time) Makes you think yea!
>
>Forgive my English I am French man doing his best to communicate in a
>foreign langage. Do not criticize my "orthograph", unless you can
>converse
>in MY natal French (and as good as I do!).
>
>
>At 11:51 PM 9/10/96 +0000, you wrote:
>>drturi wrote:
>>> survivor wrote:
>>> To all - A Supernova month is in action, thus be ready for a very
>>> destructive celestial energy affecting the weather, producing
>>> "Edouards (S)"
>
>>
>>Name the place. The date has passed.
>>
>>>
>>> Large quakes/explosions and surprises are for Sun-Mon;
>Sept.8th/9th.
>> Name the quake/explosions please!
>
>96/09/09 00:20:38 31.99S 71.39W 38.6 6.1Mb A NEAR COAST OF CENTRAL
>CHILE
>
>
>>From: @mercury.jodco.co.jp (G////on)
>To: Dr.Turi@worldnet.att.net
>Subject: TOKYO EQ - 11 SEPTEMBER 1996 WINDOW
>Content-Md5: A1J8X7B/////vcaJS8I5g==
>Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 03:01:12 +0000
>
>Dearest Dr. Turi, At 11:45 am (Tokyo time) 11 September 1996, we here
>at
>the Mt Fuji Universal Centre for Knowledge and Understanding People
>experienced an
>earthquake of, as yet, indeterminate magnitude. Thank-you, Dr. Turi,
>for
>forecasting this event. His Divine Omniscience was engaged in
>personal
>activities at the time, and enjoyed an extra burst of earth-energy.
>This
>earthquake was a direct hit for your 11 September window. Your
>spiritual
>holism and intuitive thinking have once again triumphed ! Keep-up the
>good
>work. Peace long-life, and happiness, Master
>
>I can wait to swing from N.Korea to Japan and meet those great guys in
>March
>1997. I will make a few "accurate" predictions for them before then
>;)
>
>See you upon my retrun from Texas. That is around the 19th of this
>month
>(I might have to rent a suite at at Hilton/as usual) to take care of
>all the
>people requesting my services, thus I might be a bit late. I' ll miss
>this
>group.
>
>Stay safe
>
>Respectfully to all
>
>
>Dr. Turi
>
>
Subject: Oxygen Isotopes & ALH84001
From: "Robert D. Brown"
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:47:57 -0500
Before the stable oxygen isotope ratios can be used to discern the respective parent planets/moons/asteroids
for meteorites, one must:
A) Demonstrate statistically valid differences between the meteoritic groups being compared;
B) Know the mass-dependent correction factors that should be applied for any particular rock's age of
crystallization. For example, a rock that last crystallized on Earth 4.5 billion years ago SHOULD have a
different oxygen isotope ratio than one that last crystallized, for example, last week. This is because the
accretional mass of a planetary body increases over time and the mass of the accretional body is an important
physical factor in the process that generates variations in stable oxygen isotope ratios.
We do not possess a sufficent number of SNC meteorites to make statistically valid statements re their
origin(s) on the basis of stable oxygen isotope ratios, and we do not know the rate of accretion for Mars or
Earth. Both limitations have severely restricted the scientific utility of stable oxygen isotope ratios in the
process of making valid statements re the "Martian" or SNC class of meteorites.
Robert D. Brown, M.D.
Pelorus Research Laboratory
Subject: Re: Stephen Hawking; one professor's evaluation
From: Eric Lucas
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 21:32:12 -0400
John Chandler wrote:
>
> In article <50vqki$m7j@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>,
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >In article <50qk1s$11n@news.cis.okstate.edu>
> >jpc@a.cs.okstate.edu (John Chandler) writes:
> >
> >> Come on, guys. Let's be accurate.
> >
> >> Come on, guys. Let's be accurate.
> >> APH is _not_ a dishwasher at the Cambridge Inn,
> >> he's a POT smoker (really!) at the Cambridge Inn.
> >> (The Cambridge Inn is owned by Oklahoma State Univ, it's true.)
>
> [munch]
> >
> >> APH = Antisemitic Potsmoker Hawking
> >>
> >> --
> >> John Chandler
> >> jpc@a.cs.okstate.edu
>
> Whoops!
> There he goes again, Archimedes Plutonium intentionally
> misquoting (lying). He just can't help himself, apparently.
>
> How pathetic.
>
> --
> John Chandler
> jpc@a.cs.okstate.edu
And in the process, Archie has done nothing short of ripping apart one
of the most brilliant young minds in physics. I guess Archie really
does feel threatened by such greatness!
Eric Lucas
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: Archae Solenhofen (jmcarth1@gtn.net)
Date: 10 Sep 1996 10:46:13 -0700
In article <3234F1E0.12A5@navix.net>, "Robert says...
>
>"Plate bumping" does create mountains, but the bumping is secondary, in most instances, to the immediate
>or delayed effects of impacts and gravitational accretion. RDB
Only secondary eh, hmmmmmm.... Delayed effects eh, hmmmmmm.......
Bumping plates?????????
Maybe you can state your model for mountain building on the earth's surface
for us. I find this new impact tectonics very interesting considering my
proximity to the Sudbury basin; which I am sure you will agree was a very
large impact structure. So I am sure you can use the structural characteristics
of the Sudbury basin (of course after you de-strain the deformation produced
by the Grenville orogeny (or was that another impact)) as a basis for a
comparison. BTW, don't froget to throw in some structural geology and rock
mechanics into your model.
Archae Solenhofen (jmcarth1@gtn.net)
"..every structure in a rock is significant,
none is unimportant, even if, at first sight
it may seem irrelevant."
-- Ernst Cloos , 1946
>> --
>> There is no dimension without time. --RBF (Synergetics, 527.01)
>> (Brian Hutchings -- ba137@lafn.org)
Subject: Re: continental plate motion
From: ba137@lafn.org (Brian Hutchings)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:23:01 GMT
In a previous article, cjones@mantle.colorado.edu (Craig Jones) says:
very interesting; anyway, doc.Brown's question
about the volcanists of 30ya, re the topos of Moon, are exactly
what Patrick Moore, FRAS gets into in his books on the moon,
with the proviso that the 2 editions that I read put a different spin
on it, considering that there'd been such a jerk
toward the other extreme, of assuming that they're *all* impacts;
it just doesn't wash with the nonrandom features, he thought.
anyway, I don't see how you can escape the verdicts
of the Emperor Seamounts that were mentioned, doctor.
I'd like to know if the force *of* the rifts' acreting magma,
which has been compared to a shoptool called a _________, are enough
to shove the plates into the trenches, *if*
they're melted, there, rather than subducted, as is assumed. (unfortunately,
I've forgotten the name of the machine-tool, but
it essentially generates huge pressures from 2 thick plates
that are edge-on .-)
>Actually there is a third mechanism involving body forces related to the
>topography of the ocean floor (it sort of gets mentioned in the explanation
>of edge forces). While "slab pull" is truly an edge force, "ridge push" is
>more an integration of body forces all through the ocean floor. (Coblentz
>and Sandiford have had a few papers the past few years on this set of
>calculations). This avoids embarrassingly high stresses within oceanic
>lithosphere.
--
There is no dimension without time. --RBF (Synergetics, 527.01)
(Brian Hutchings -- ba137@lafn.org)
Subject: Re: Pelorus Research Laboratory
From: "Robert D. Brown"
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 21:17:25 -0500
Brian C. Reed wrote:
>
> :
> I have a question what is the Pelorus Research Laboratory and what
> does it research.
The Pelorus Research Laboratory is a privately owned corporation that performs contract research analyses.
Current research projects are federally funded through direct grants. Two projects are presently underway.
One project involves the supercomputer simulation of parity-breaking interactions of coronal mass ejections
(CME's) with comet tails. Comet tails are radially oriented in respect to the Sun and extend many millions of
miles behind cometary nuclei. CME's are non-linear processes through which large volumes of solar coronal
material are ejected from the Sun's rotating surface. Because of their confinement by magnetic flux and
self-gravitation, these large masses of hot solar gas retain angular momentum as they traject away from the
Sun. This motion relative to prograde and retrograde moving long period comets establishes the theoretical
foundations for "parity-breaking" interactions with comet tails. It is hypothesized that this parity-breaking
interaction of CME's with comet tails may explain: (A) the origin of asteroids as "CME-Fried Comets", and B)
the asymmetrical distribution of long, intermediate, and short period comets. This theoretical work may, in
the distant future, outline a way to ablate large Earth-heading comets using non-nuclear technologies.
The second active research project involves the crystalline precipitation of monomeric organic molecules in
magnetic environments (e.g. elementally pure iron) and their impact-catalyzed polymerization. Current work is
directed toward the abiotic synthesis of nucleotide polymers that have individually unique
surface-complementary peptides.
Robert D. Brown, M.D.
Founder
Pelorus Research Laboratory
> Brian Reed
> MS Geological Sciences SDSU
Subject: Re: Write-in vote Archimedes Plutonium, next US president !!
From: Eric Lucas
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 22:48:09 -0400
Now, I gotta be the first one to admit that this is funny stuff below!
(I'm serious!) He don't know snot about science, but his humorous prose
is just brilliant. "PUT A HEAVY ELEMENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE THIS FALL"
bumper stickers??? Hee hee hee. (ROTFL) What a knee-slapper!
Well done, Archie.
Cheers,
Eric
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> There is exactly *one* difference between AP and Clinton and Dole:
> there's only one of him, but there are a four of them. Think about
> it--both espouse completely unprovable/untestable "theories", that they
> claim explain everything, but in reality only explain things through
> fiat. Both are very enticing "theories" that offer false promises of
> explaining everything, and lull minds that don't know better into
> believing them. Both have delusions of grandeur and both will insult
> you with sanctimonious self-aggrandisement if you dare to disagree with
> them. One damns you to hell if you don't agree with them, and the other
> damns you to taxes (although I fail to see why being committed to
> eating Big Macs forever is any form of damnation!) And both are always
> quoting some damn "hymn" or "prayer" or another at MacDonalds.
>
> Don't get me correct, I agree that Archie is the best candidate than
> the democrats. But make no mistake, both parties *are* true forces of
> ignorance, and the only difference is that the Democrats have amassed
> a much larger following.
>
> So write in your vote of Archimedes Plutonium
>
> Sponsored by the Eric Lucas, David Bromage, and Dan Evens , and the League of Women > campaign to elect AP to the Oval Office
>
> PUT A HEAVY ELEMENT IN THE WHITE HOUSE THIS FALL bumper sticker will be
> sent to the Plutonium for President
>
> Archie can be seen in the Debate televized on CNN next month.
>
> Archie's campaign slogan is
>
> " Vote for me, I am the man who will stay
>
> Right with you and see this thing Through "
>
>
>
> Vote for the man who will stay right there with you and see this thing
> through to the end.
>
> So please write in your vote , no matter if you are a foreigner or not, in > fact post your vote to the newsgroup sci.chem and show your support for the > Next to be Elected President of the United States -- Archimedes Plutonium
>
> ELect Archimedes Plutonium as the next president of the US
>
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Date: 9 Sep 1996 17:47:12 -0500
>required original, intelligent design in making both the
>computer, itself, and the microcoding required for the cpu.
>I would never compare anything to evolution since I do not
>believe the theory in the first place.
Boy, sometimes don'tchya want to take these engineer weenies
pig-ignorant of chemistry and biology and just slap them
around a while?
>All chance. But that is also not what some other evolutionists
>speak. They speak of goals. Even the word 'selection' implies
>some sort of mechanism which implies a plan. If there is no
>plan, no purpose, as you say, then how can one speak of
>'selection,' regardles of what one claims to be the impetus,
> natural that is?
The purpose behind biological evolution is to leave descendants.
Next question.
>If you say so. Yet if it all happened by accident, why can you
>not replicate it. Do not theories require replication and
>predictability.
Do you understand statistics? Do you believe that there is such
a thing as a valid statistical theory? If so, predict the next
Texas state lotto number. Is the light beginning to dawn? (Hint:
random continginencies are important for predicting outcomes
even a complete theory is in hand.)
>That is what I said. Those who wrote the program could not beat
>him, so they could not write a program which could beat him. No
>argument there. Hell, I know. I beat Fischer three times. No
>machine could do that.
[...]
>Write a program which can beat me in chess. You will not be able
>to do it because you probably can't beat me in the first place.
Jerkweed. The computer beat Kasparov in the first game. Go
learn somthing about the biological science of the last 150
years and you may avoid embarassing yourself in ithis way in
the future.
Subject: Re: Alsace region, France
From: lecleach@cgi.ensmp.fr (Le Cleac'h Jean-Michel)
Date: 11 Sep 1996 07:26:27 GMT
In article <50.48737795.Logic.IS@logicbbs.org>, Marilyn.Fraser@logicbbs.org
says...
>
>I am a geology student and planning a trip to the mineral show at
>Ste-Marie-aux-Mines next June. I would like any information on the geology
>of the area - minerals that might be found (for collecting) and if there is
>a possibility of fossils that could be collected there.
>
>I would also be interested in the general geology of the area. It is in the
>valley called the valley of silver because there were active silver mines
>there.
>
>Thanks for any tips, info or ideas.
Marilyn,
I don't know precisely about fossils in the Sainte Marie aux Mines district,
probably there is some of them in the Alsace plain, others can be found in the
Lorraine region neighbour of the Alsace/Vosges region.
The region was very rich in mines (silver...), one of them has been converted
in museum and can be visited.
I know the region is still a paradise for micromounters.
I recommand, if you read french,those two books:
"Mineraux et mines du Massif vosgien"
J-L Hohl
(price is 275 FF)
"Vosges, Alsace"
J-P, Von Eller
Serie des guides geologiques Masson
(price is 192 FF)
Both can be purchase at:
"Mineraux & Fossiles"
10 rue de Marignan
75008 PARIS
FRANCE
phone; (33-1) 42.25.91.85
Fax: (33-1) 42.25.74.34
Hope this helps.
Best regards
#######################################################################
Jean-Michel Le Cleac'h lecleach@cgi.ensmp.fr
Ecole des Mines de Paris Tel: (33-1) 40.51.91.65
60 Bd. Saint-Michel Fax: (33-1) 43.26.36.56
75006 PARIS http://www.ensmp.fr/
FRANCE see our minerals collection:
http://cri.ensmp.fr/mineral
Ce message est emis a titre personnel et n'engage pas l'Ecole des Mines de
Paris.
This message reflects my own opinion and does not engage the Ecole des Mines
de Paris.
#########################################################################
Subject: *****PostDoc VACANCY**** NCPGG Adelaide, Australia
From: Cedric Griffiths
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:40:19 +0900
We have a vacancy for a PostDoctoral Fellow in Quantitative
Stratigraphic Modelling (ref. 4943).
The position is available for an initial period of 12 months.
The NCPGG home page is on http://www.ncpgg.adelaide.edu.au/ncpgg.html
The project involves the design and implementation of 2D forward and
inverse stratigraphic models. Experience with quantitative modelling,
genetic algorithms, and mathematical inversion is required.
Further information can be obtained from:
Prof. Cedric M. Griffiths,
National Centre for
Petroleum Geology and Geophysics
University of Adelaide, SA 5005,
Australia
http://www.ncpgg.adelaide.edu.au/ncpgg.html
Fax: +61 8 303 4345 EMail cgriffiths@ncpgg.adelaide.edu.au
Subject: Re: WELL! (Mr. Turi is a complete fraud)
From: LincMad@Eureka.vip.best.com (Linc Madison)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 01:43:52 -0700
In article <515kfr$lf5@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Dr.Turi@worldnet.att.net (Mr. Turi) wrote:
> Well, today is 9/11 in Japan........Tokyo has a 6.6 earthquake,
> centered
> in the Pacific.....with a Tsunanmi warning. You were at least on the
> right side of the world on this.
You still haven't explained how you MISSED the much LARGER 7.1 earthquake
earlier in the week, that was completely OUTSIDE all of your "windows."
You are a fraud and a charlatan.
--
** Unsolicited commercial Email delivered to this address will be
subject to a $1500 charge. Emailing such items, whether manually or
automatically, constitutes acceptance of these terms & conditions.**
Linc Madison * San Francisco, Calif. * LincMad@Eureka.vip.best.com
Subject: Re: Major MLM scam?
From: BECMan
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:58:32 +1000
dnorton@ici.net wrote:
>
> Why join an ongoing MLM program when you can start your own with half the initial investment !!
>
> Because of the potential of making thousands, there must be an investment up front.
> Most MLM programs this investment is usually between $200.--$400.
> When joining an ongoing program you must first purchase four (4) reports at $5.00 each ,
> for a total initial investment of $20. Hereís the problem, if you decide that
> the program is not what you expected, you lose the $20. Instead of wasting $20 on a program you
> may not use, Invest just $5.00 and receive insiders information on how these plans really operate.
> In this detail packet you will be provided with the following information ,
>
> 1. Testimonials from real people like yourself .
> 2. Brief descriptions on the following four reports.(which are the heart of the plan.)
> REPORT #1 ėHow to make $250,000 through multi-level sales.î
> REPORT #2 ėMajor corporations and multi-level sales.î
> REPORT #3 ėSources for the best mailing lists.î
> REPORT #4 ėEvaluating multi-level sales programs.î
>
> With this information, you will be able to make an educated decision as to whether or not multi-level sales is right for you. Also you will get
information on
>
> For the above information packet, send $5.00 cash and a self addressed satmped enveloped to:
>
> J.R.
> PO BOX 492
> RANDOLPH, MA 02368This really only works for about the first 2 or 3 levels. If you did the
maths you will find out that by the time your turn comes you will need more
people that there are on earth. This is using the conservative figures
outlined on your info packet.
ie if you send it to 100 people (first level). 10% accept then this will
cause 1000 letters to be sent (second level).10% send 100 letters this makes
100x100 = 10000 letters sent (third level). 10% send 100 letters this makes
1000x100 = 1E5 (fourth level). 10% send 100 letters -> 1E6. 10% send 100
-> 1E7 ie 10 million people. This is when you get your money. This means that
by if i live in Australia (Australia~20 million people) for 1 out of 2 woman
man and child must have aggreed to sent 100 letters. By this time you all
those who did not accept must have got a lot of letters, (that is if you did
not get picked by any of the other chains generated by you) and the post will
then be billionares, as well as the people who make envelopes and paper.
This process is not self sustained. It does not generate wealth it only moves
it. In the end if it kept going with 10% acceptance in a few month you would
eventually get millions of letters, which would cost more to continue than
the money you made in the first place.
Stop this rip off !!!
I beleive there are some countries where this is illigal. Unfortunately they
(the chain letter generators) came up with the solution of "selling" some
second hand paper (already printed on and usless other than for recycling).
But it is the same rip off.
The education system should include this example in the maths curriculum so
that people do not fall for it.
Francisco A. Shi
Subject: Re: good engineering
From: spwebb@iafrica.com (Sean Webb)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 10:25:03 GMT
On 9/9/96 12:11AM, in message <50vga2$ck5@niflheim.rutgers.edu>, Michael
Huemer wrote:
> mwfisher@cts.com (Michael W. Fisher) writes:
>
> > And nature doesn't give one tiny shit about the phenotypes opinion
> >in the matter, even if the phenotype has achieved the self-consciousness
> >necessary to have an opinion.
>
> Well, since nature isn't conscious, nature doesn't really give a shit
> about anything. But I take it the metaphor is that the organism's
> opinions don't affect the likelihood of its reproducing. Actually,
> this doesn't seem to be true. If the organism, if it's
> self-conscious, *wants* to reproduce copies of itself, then it is much
> more likely to do so than if it doesn't want to.
>
> > Women achieve full physical maturity alightly earlier than men, but
> >even for men, final physical maturity is achieved at about 25. Measurable
> >physical deterioration sets in after 30--which if you recall is the mean
> >age of adult death in pre-technological societies.
>
> I suspect the first figure is high, and the second one low (not that
> it really makes much difference). It seems to me that men are
> physiologically mature at the age of about 16 (we're not talking about
> emotionally). Also, isn't 30 a little young for deterioration? I
> would think it would be more like 30. And remember that the life
> expectancy was low mostly because of infant mortality, not because
> people had heart attacks at 30. (Remember that if half the people
> died at 1 year old, then the true life expectancy, if you removed all
> of those babies, would have to be around 60. I do not know what the
> infant mortality statistics actually are, though.)
>
> --
> ^-----^
> Michael Huemer / O O \
> http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~owl | V |
> \ /
FYI
Physical deterioration sets in at appx 26 yrs of age.
From that age onwards , the rate of cell death exceeds cell replacement in the
human body.
Sean Webb
Subject: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
From: "N. Gat"
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:03:07 -0700
Subject: Publishing Scholarly Work on the Web -- opinion anyone?
I'd appreciate any pro and con arguments on the subject of this letter.
Since this matter touches upon all the sci.*, many comp.* and other
newsgroups, I'll try to cross post this message.
The TechExpo Web site would like to open up a ScienceExpo section
dedicated to the publication of scholarly works in HTML format (TechExpo
already provides an array of services to the science & technology
community; see http://www.techexpo.com).
THE RATIONALE IS AS FOLLOWS:
1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
months to over a year.
2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
3) The access to the work is limited because many libraries do not carry
the journal, or it is too expensive for an individual subscription
4) A journal in any field carries work that is much broader than that of
individual researcher or engineer so important papers are often obscured
because they do not quite belong in any particular journal.
5) Because of the multi-disciplinary nature of technology and science,
some topic have applicability in more than one field, and no journal or
conference may cover such broad fields.
6) Papers posted at ScienceExpo will be searchable not only by key
words, but the author will be able to select any number of applicability
categories from a list of over 400 existing categories (see the TechExpo
classification schedule).
7) papers will be searchable via all the Web search engines.
8) The author can still submit the posted paper to refereed journals.
PUBLICATIONS AT ScienceExpo WILL:
a) Appear within 48 hours of submittal
b) The paper will be immediately available to the entire community
c) The paper will indexed and could be found by all researchers via the
Internet search engines, or internal ScienceExpo search tools (using any
keyword, author name, institution name, etc.)
d) The author can select any number of fields of science and technology
form a list of over 400 (see TechExpo Classification Schedule) to reach
the target audience much broader than any one journal can
e) Authors can hot-link all references directly from their paper
f) On-line discussion of papers can be conducted within the appropriate
UseNet groups
g) Papers may be copies and printed or forwarded to others
electronically or by other means.
SOME PROPOSED GROUND RULES:
(A) Work submitted must be of original nature and of value to science or
technology
(B) The paper must carry the full names of the authors and institution,
including address, phone number, fax, and e-mail.
(C) Ethical conduct: Papers posted at ScienceExpo should be treated as
any other publication. They represent the scientific work of colleagues
and should be treated as such. If information is quoted, the proper
reference should be given credit.
(D) When copying, forwarding, etc., the entire paper, including the
authors information, institution, as well as the ScienceExpo source
should be included.
Obviously ScienceExpo will not referee papers; the authors' names and
the institution they represent are put on the line -- so posting papers
ON-LINE should be given as much or more care and thought as submitting a
paper to prestigious journals
A FEW TECHNICALITIES:
(i) The entire paper must be submitted in HTML, and graphs, figures and
charts in gif or jpg format (this is a deviation from common formats
requiring PostScript or TEX, to allow viewing papers using the
newsreader built into popular browsers, and to allow indexing such
papers by all the Web search engines)
(ii) Maximum size for text files and graphics will have to be observed
(iii) Equation should be edited using the HTML specifications, or
scanned and pasted as graphics files
(iv) It is the author's responsibility to secure authorization of the
institution and/or the research funding authority to submit the
publication.
Finally here is the most sticky point. If the service if totally free
of charge, I'm concerned there will be a deluge of frivolous
publishing. I consider a fee structure to act as a "potential
Barrier." A low, yet significant fee (hopefully) will discourage the
unwarranted publications, but will not be too high to discourage worthy
publications. Perhaps academic institutions will receive a discount,
but corporations will pay somewhat higher fee also to defray the costs
of the service.
So one question is whether a fee imposed on publication will completely
stifle interest? Is for example, a one-time publication fee of $400 for
a corporation, and $100 for academia too high a fee?
One more comment as to why should TechExpo do this. In my opinion
technical societies (and I belong to a few) could do the job but the
problem of cross discipline relevance will not be solved. So being
unaffiliated with any technical society or technical magazine, TechExpo
is a neutral ground most appropriate for this job. What's more,
TechExpo is already providing technology and science information for
almost two years.
Is this idea totally freakish?
Well, the floor is now open for debate.
Private communications are welcomed but posted comments/debate is
preferred.
Nahum Gat, Ph.D.
President
Opto-Knowledge Systems, Inc. (OKSI)
Web: http://www.techexpo.com/WWW/opto-knowledge
E-mail: oksi@cerfnet.com
or
nahum@techexpo.com
Subject: Re: Creation VS Evolution (or science Vs religion)
From: mwfisher@cts.com (Michael W. Fisher)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 03:36:32 -0700
In article <3234245e.68926941@news.esinet.net>, Shack Toms says...
->spwebb@iafrica.com (Sean Webb) wrote:
->
->>Just one question ..
->>
->>How many creationists are non religious ??
->>
->>If the answer is very few, if any (the most likely answer) , then its
about religion,
->>nothing to do with science.
->
->But actually it turns out that you are wrong. There is very
->little correlation between a person's religion and the likelihood
->he thinks that God created the Earth less than 10,000 years ago.
->
->cite:
-
>http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/physics/faculty/sokal/afterword_v1a/footnode.
html#167
->
->[In the above reference, Professor Sokal has complained about the
->poor quality of science education in the schools and uses the
->widespread belief in creationism to document his case. He is
->*not* a creationist himself.]
->
Be very cautious about the inferences you try and draw from a
footnote. There are too many unaswered questions.
What did Gallup consider a religion? How was the question asked? How
was the data reported? E.g., was each different major protestant
denomination a "different religion" in the report? How many different
religions were actually part of the survey? Just how was the question
asked? (It can make a huge difference)
How many resoponses were provided? I.e., a multiple choice response can
give extremely skewed results if the responses aren't chosen carefully--and
sometimes even if they are. (ever written a multiple choice test and been
stunned by the way one question was answered? No matter how careful you
are, you just can't always predict how others will interprite the
question.) How were unanswered questions handled? Have you ever answered
some survey type questionare and wanted to write your own response in
because none of the choices applied? Did you pick an answer or skip it, and
if you picked an answer, how cloe was it to what you really
thought/felt/believed, etc.
Ciao.
--
Michael Fisher, ET1/SS USN ret., lawstudent
http://www.sonoma.edu/cthink/Library/intraits.html
* * *
He that would make his own liberty secure,
must guard even his enemy from oppression;
for if he violates this duty,
he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
Thomas Paine
Subject: Re: good engineering
From: Erik Max Francis
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 02:36:26 -0700
Michael Huemer wrote:
> But that isn't really the best example
> of the point, since your genes or evolution (or whatever we're
> personifying here) doesn't 'want' you to die at a particular time.
> That is, there's no reproductive advantage to dying.
Not for you, but there is for every other organism in your niche. After all,
evolution doesn't work without death.
> If you can find
> a way to extend your life span, that is all in accord with your genes'
> plans.
Only if you're still able to reproduce.
--
Erik Max Francis, &tSftDotIotE; http://www.alcyone.com/max/ max@alcyone.com
San Jose, California ICBM 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W R^4: the 4th R is respect
"Out from his breast/his soul went to seek/the doom of the just." -- _Beowulf_
Subject: Req. for Minerals and Rocks Images/Clips
From: Suvinay Sinha
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:27:02 -0500
Hi,
I am looking for images/clips/pictures of various minerals and rocks
for my Physical Geology Web page. I did find a lot of mineral images
(mostly copyrighted) - which is okay by me as I can link them but
was unable to find rock images. I would appreciate if anyone who
knew or has these images (and is willing to share) could either
either email me or direct me to homepage/ftp sites from where I could
download them.
Thanks in advance,
Sinha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
**************************************************************************
Suvinay Sinha |||| ||||
3175, CIVL |||| * * |||| Sarcasm is the lowest
Ph : (317) 494-0274 (Lab) |||| | |||| form of humour.
(317) 494-0754 (Off) |||| \_/ ||||
(317) 743-7091 (Hom) |||| ||||
**************************************************************************
http://www.geo.purdue.edu/~sinha/geos111/Welcome.html
Department of Earth & Atm Scis., Purdue University,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: the creation vs. evolution flood
From: tony richards
Date: 11 Sep 1996 09:29:12 GMT
Ed Nuhfer wrote:
>Dan Evens wrote:
>>
>> Do you knobs think you've spewed enough crap into the science newsgroups yet?
>> Go away. Post your creation vs evolution crap in newsgroups where it is
>> relevant. This does not include sci.physics, or sci.astronomy.
>>
>> You are boring. You are wasting people's time. Take a hike.
>> Dan Evens
>
>Dan, you have a lot of agreement here. The sci groups are getting so
>polluted with sheer nonsense from religious kooks that it's hard for our
>science forums to be used for obtaining useful information or for
>serious discussion. Maybe it's a way for these dweebs to subvert
>science. Maybe we should all post 10 math problems a day each onto their
>discussion groups until they really get the hint.
>Ed Nuhfer
I totally agree with dan and Ed.
Why don't we agree that there is
no way of 'proving' that the whole universe did not
come into existence a fraction of a second ago, complete
with fossils and all other types of 'memory'?
'They' can believe that, we can believe something else and get
on with physics. Whatever 'they' come up with, it will always fail
to counter the above scenario, in my humble opinion.
--
Tony Richards 'when I was a very young I had this strange'
Rutherford Appleton Lab 'feeling of being trapped in a young girl's body'
UK 'then I was born and it all worked itself out ok'