Test

[Bob Casanova]

Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

[John Harshman]

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Taking a day off.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

You’re here but your reference is off. Andrew McCarthy deep dove the “Brat
Pack” recently so Bueller is now faux pas. Plus Charlie Sheen in that
movie. You should have pre-cleared this!

[Bob Casanova]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 01:50:08 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

You’re here but your reference is off. Andrew McCarthy deep dove the “Brat
Pack” recently so Bueller is now faux pas. Plus Charlie Sheen in that
movie. You should have pre-cleared this!

*No* idea what that's all about (or who "Andrew McCarthy"
might be), but OK.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 01:50:08 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

You’re here but your reference is off. Andrew McCarthy deep dove the “Brat
Pack” recently so Bueller is now faux pas. Plus Charlie Sheen in that
movie. You should have pre-cleared this!

*No* idea what that's all about (or who "Andrew McCarthy"
might be), but OK.

Philistine! What no “Breakfast Club”, “St. Elmo’s Fire”, “Pretty in Pink”,
or the now cringy “Sixteen Candles”? Not even the classic “Weekend at
Bernies” that predicted the coming presidential debate X2? Rob Lowe, Emilio
Estevez, Ally Sheedy, Judd Nelson, Demi Moore, Molly Ringworm? As a stretch
James Spader and Jon Cryer?

And for Bueller (Emilio’s brother does not a Brat Pack movie make):

He did costar with Cryer in a much loved sitcom before famously melting
down.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 23:02:45 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 01:50:08 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

You?re here but your reference is off. Andrew McCarthy deep dove the ?Brat
Pack? recently so Bueller is now faux pas. Plus Charlie Sheen in that
movie. You should have pre-cleared this!

*No* idea what that's all about (or who "Andrew McCarthy"
might be), but OK.

Philistine! What no “Breakfast Club”, “St. Elmo’s Fire”, “Pretty in Pink”,
or the now cringy “Sixteen Candles”? Not even the classic “Weekend at
Bernies” that predicted the coming presidential debate X2? Rob Lowe, Emilio
Estevez, Ally Sheedy, Judd Nelson, Demi Moore, Molly Ringworm? As a stretch
James Spader and Jon Cryer?

OK. But Andrew McCarthy?

http://youtu.be/H19uKs99vIw
He did costar with Cryer in a much loved sitcom before famously melting
down.

[William Hyde]

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.

Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

William Hyde

[JTEM]

Post by William Hyde
Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

Liar.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

[erik simpson]

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

[Bob Casanova]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

Perhaps I shouldn't have killed off Pagano and his geocentrism?
OTOH, he was becoming excessively repetitive.
Volume for the sake of volume also becomes boring,

Jan

[Bob Casanova]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 09:17:06 +0200, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

Acknowledged. But I think a larger part of it is that Usenet
itself is becoming obsolete; most people who contributed to
sites such as t.o or sci.skeptic in the past have gone to
following blogs in which comments, thoughtful or otherwise,
are the norm. The serious "sci" sites may still be doing OK,
but I have no real idea if that's the case or if they've
gone to the "blogoverse" as well.

Whatever, 44 years (~30 for me) is/was a good run, and
communications venues *also* evolve.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 09:17:06 +0200, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

Acknowledged. But I think a larger part of it is that Usenet
itself is becoming obsolete; most people who contributed to
sites such as t.o or sci.skeptic in the past have gone to
following blogs in which comments, thoughtful or otherwise,
are the norm. The serious "sci" sites may still be doing OK,
but I have no real idea if that's the case or if they've
gone to the "blogoverse" as well.
Whatever, 44 years (~30 for me) is/was a good run, and
communications venues *also* evolve.

Not really.
sci.physics is almost exclusively crossposting Russian only,
sci.physics.relativity is mostly a crackpot hangout,
a bit like t.o., but with more crackpot.

The once serious sci.physics.research (moderated by article)
has degenerated almost completely into dialogue
between one civilised crackpot and the moderators,

Jan

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 10:45:14 +0200, the following appeared

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 09:17:06 +0200, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

Acknowledged. But I think a larger part of it is that Usenet
itself is becoming obsolete; most people who contributed to
sites such as t.o or sci.skeptic in the past have gone to
following blogs in which comments, thoughtful or otherwise,
are the norm. The serious "sci" sites may still be doing OK,
but I have no real idea if that's the case or if they've
gone to the "blogoverse" as well.
Whatever, 44 years (~30 for me) is/was a good run, and
communications venues *also* evolve.

Not really.
sci.physics is almost exclusively crossposting Russian only,
sci.physics.relativity is mostly a crackpot hangout,
a bit like t.o., but with more crackpot.
The once serious sci.physics.research (moderated by article)
has degenerated almost completely into dialogue
between one civilised crackpot and the moderators,

That's a shame, but as I noted I assume the real research
(and other serious) science people are still communicating,
but somewhere other than Usenet.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 10:45:14 +0200, the following appeared

Post by J. J. Lodder

Post by Bob Casanova
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 09:17:06 +0200, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos
(pbuh) left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already. Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane
participants were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no
one expected, the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar
story at sci.lang, much more recently, which is surviving now almost
entirely due to the efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much
more lively a few years ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one
person.

Acknowledged. But I think a larger part of it is that Usenet
itself is becoming obsolete; most people who contributed to
sites such as t.o or sci.skeptic in the past have gone to
following blogs in which comments, thoughtful or otherwise,
are the norm. The serious "sci" sites may still be doing OK,
but I have no real idea if that's the case or if they've
gone to the "blogoverse" as well.
Whatever, 44 years (~30 for me) is/was a good run, and
communications venues *also* evolve.

Not really.
sci.physics is almost exclusively crossposting Russian only,
sci.physics.relativity is mostly a crackpot hangout,
a bit like t.o., but with more crackpot.
The once serious sci.physics.research (moderated by article)
has degenerated almost completely into dialogue
between one civilised crackpot and the moderators,

That's a shame, but as I noted I assume the real research
(and other serious) science people are still communicating,
but somewhere other than Usenet.

No doubt, but much more fragmented, I guess.
Usenet as an open world-wide forum has been lost,

Jan

[erik simpson]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already.  Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane participants
were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no one expected,
the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar story at sci.lang,
much more recently, which is surviving now almost entirely due to the
efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much more lively a few years
ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one person.

Useful idiots..

[Martin Harran]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 12:34:49 -0700, erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 17:46:13 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson

Post by erik simpson

Post by *Hemidactylus*

Post by William Hyde

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yes.
Haven't been seeing any posts lately, myself.

It has slowed down a bit since Google Groups went away and Nyikos (pbuh)
left us.

Nyikos (pbuh, indeed) generated a lot of heat, if not so much light.
We've also apparently lost most if not all creationists, and ID
proponents are down to Ron D, if he hasn't left already.  Alas.

"Alas" for "if he hasn't left", right?

It may be that it was Ron Dean who was keeping this group alive. In the
1990s I participated in a dicussion group at which someone kept sending
idiotic posts, and a lot of the contributions from the sane participants
were stimulated by these. Eventually he left, but, as no one expected,
the group died shortly afterwards. There is a similar story at sci.lang,
much more recently, which is surviving now almost entirely due to the
efforts of one (sane) contributor, but was much more lively a few years
ago, due to the idiotic contributions of one person.

Useful idiots..

Nothing terribly new there, Galileo employed that approach near enough
400 years ago, using an idiot to show up foolish ideas. Unfortunately,
it didn't work out too well for him and I don't think it is working
well either for those on the side of science nowadays. You don't win
many hearts or minds by telling someone that they are an idiot or
getting their ideas from an idiot.

[erik simpson]

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish, I wish he'd go away...

When I came home last night at three
The man was waiting there for me
But when I looked around the hall
I couldn't see him there at all!
Go away, go away, don't you come back any more!
Go away, go away, and please don't slam the door... (slam!)

Last night I saw upon the stair
A little man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
Oh, how I wish he'd go away...

- Hughes Mearns

[Burkhard]

Post by erik simpson

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish, I wish he'd go away...
When I came home last night at three
The man was waiting there for me
But when I looked around the hall
I couldn't see him there at all!
Go away, go away, don't you come back any more!
Go away, go away, and please don't slam the door... (slam!)
Last night I saw upon the stair
A little man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
Oh, how I wish he'd go away...
- Hughes Mearns

I wrote a paper about this!

https://richterzeitung.weblaw.ch/jusletter-it/dam/publicationsystem_leges/fses/16_S_293_320_Schafer.pdf

see esp. 312 ff

[erik simpson]

Post by Burkhard

Post by erik simpson

Post by Bob Casanova
Anybody there? Bueller? Bueller?

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish, I wish he'd go away...
When I came home last night at three
The man was waiting there for me
But when I looked around the hall
I couldn't see him there at all!
Go away, go away, don't you come back any more!
Go away, go away, and please don't slam the door... (slam!)
Last night I saw upon the stair
A little man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
Oh, how I wish he'd go away...
- Hughes Mearns

I wrote a paper about this!
https://richterzeitung.weblaw.ch/jusletter-it/dam/publicationsystem_leges/fses/16_S_293_320_Schafer.pdf
see esp. 312 ff

Thoughtful paper. I might suggest a "part D": what is the nature of the
law that is to be applied? Often laws ("created" by elected assemblies)
are less than perfectly framed. They may occasionally be internally
inconsistent, or in the United States may be unconstitutional. The
latter case raises the specter of the Supreme Court using either
"conservative" or "creative" interpretations.

As a retired computer professional, I am deeply suspicious of AI. I
have never encountered a computer program of sufficient complexity to be
interesting that was free of bugs, or at least subject to unexpected
output when given unexpected input.