Stonehead

Heretics, gadflies, contrarians, radicals…yeah, it’s a freak show but they’re damned fascinating. It’s their ideas that animate these characters, not that they’re right but that they often hold ideas at odds with the mainstream, the orthodox, and occasionally history proves these oddballs possessed a bit of truth. Also, who is not fascinated by the phenomenon of paradigm shift, the evolution of explanatory theories? Kuhn called it a revolution. And if not a revolution, we see a refinement of theory, things such as Eldridge and Gould’s Punctuated Equilibrium. Distracters argued that Eldridge and Gould’s ideas cast doubt on evolution as a whole but they were misunderstanding that this refinement fit squarely with the neo-Darwinian synthesis. The explanatory power of evolutionary theory was strengthened with a better fit to the data. I recently saw two science articles that show that our picture of reality is so incomplete. Granted we have a hell of a lot of knowledge but there are many more surprises pending. Is It a Particle, a Wave Or Both? Science Team Revisits Nature of Light Physicists challenge notion of electric nerve impulses; say sound more likely

This professor at Oral Roberts University says that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has messianic beliefs. Oh, the irony! Ahmadinejad Awaits the Hidden Imam

I think this is faulty reasoning. There are many hypotheses about recidivism rate causes, this control issue only being one of them. I think I put enough weasel words in there. Not saying it's the only reason. Only said that it says something about lack of control. Sure, in some cases, high recidivism might be due to a bad law.

The Situationist

[gvideo]3807826142091223684[/gvideo]

Just seems to me that judicial activism has faded from the limelight. More appropriately, look to the Executive Branch for actions pursuing far reaching change. So you're bothered that they (the 9th) don't consistently stick to what you see as their modus operandi? Here's the example of one person who did almost a 180. It's one person mind you but I don't view it as flipflopping rather it's a natural evolution of thought in a mature thinker. An Early Environmentalist, Embracing New ‘Heresies’ --New York Times

Ok, tinfoil hat time. Politics has some strange bedfellows.* Maybe (and this is way long maybe) the goal was actually to destablize the region and to keep it in flux. Isn't this part of the strategy used for years in Lebanon? * October Surprise Conspiracy

How do you know that the majority of what we consider a threat from groups such as Al Qaida and ELF is not something manufactured? Also, here's a different take on our perception of violence in today's world. Steven Pinker on the Decline of Violence--http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/006259.html

It's like some weird two-headed creature with each head struggling for dominance.

As long as the chick is not into this. NSFW, not safe anytime? Sick.

I don't look at this manufactured dicthotomy of Republican-Democrat. There's good and bad in both. One of the questions I ask is "is it sensible?" that is assuming the stance that the proposer is acting out of good intentions. The problem is that the practice of politics renders everything Byzantine. http://www.noogenesis.com/pineapple/blind_men_elephant.html

Haven't had time to fully digest this article but it appears applicable to many topics ranging from climbing to geopolitics: The Psychology of Security--http://www.schneier.com/essay-155.html

The sleight-of-hand trick appears to be working. All eyes on Iran as troublemakers. Did you see 300?

Syriana

I think most of us common folk are so out of the loop with what's really going on. I mean how can we not be? We rely on MSM and blogs for information. What the hell is Bolton talking about? Does Iran actually have any nuclear weapons to give up? I suspect this rhetoric about regime change has more to do with Iran's efforts to assert itself as a regional leader if what they say is true concerning the peaceful goals of their nuclear research. For the record, which countries in the Middle East/Near East have nuclear weapons? There are other ways to engage Iran, for instance, by controlling opium production in Afghanistan. Poppy proliferation--Opium production and consumption in Afghanistan and Iran If I recall correctly, opium production and use was a significant factor in the rise of the Taliban.

Bong Hits 4 Jesus!

What matters is how did the dead man respond to the visions in the Bardo?

Of course this particular situation is hypothetical. But as I have mentioned in the thread, I have both been in a situation where I was attacked and I have been in a situation where I have actually killed living things. I know myself and my reactions pretty well, so I although I cannot say with 100% accuracy exactly what I would do in this hypothetical situation, I know myself and know my history well enough to give a pretty good picture of what I would do. Should the onus be on the gunowner or the dog owner? Which one should take reasonable care to ensure that the additional element, dogs or gun, does not cause potential harm to the other? How much reasonable care and in what form?

of newborn baby

of orange.

Behavior, not character. Neither of the two men knew each other so this information cannot have a direct bearing on the incident as far as how the shooter reacted. But if they were acquainted then this information would change things. Perhaps this wasn't the first time that the two encountered each other? Of course, that's pure speculation in the absence of corroborating information.

Well, it's one of those hypothetical situations. "I'd shoot the dogs." "I'd wait and assess the threat." I'd fire three shots into the ground in front of the man." "I'd climb onto a rock." Etc. I think the judge saw it that way too. Automatic response.

According to the 1st article, one of the detective believed it was justifiable homocide. I suppose it's the sentencing that might be the point of contention. Homocide--Wikipedia Justifiable homocide = noncriminal homocide [quote}Judge: Mr. Fish, I do sentence you to the mitigated term of imprisonment of 10 years in the Department of Corrections for the death of Grant Kuenzli. Ten years in prison: no possibility of parole.{/quote] MSNBC story

poop EZzX2MslDMw

Firing the gun to scare the dogs was the mistake that set everything in motion. I normally carry trekking poles, and one of them held out in the direction of the dog is all that would have been required to fend it off. Much ado was made in the trial about the large caliber of the weapon and the fact that it was equipped with hollow point bullets. Had this been in a city park, I could buy that argument, but this was not a city park. It was a wilderness area where there are bears and mountain lions. I don't fear such animals but there are many people who do. If you are going to carry a weapon for that reason it needs to be effective. It's the combination of all of the factors: large calibre pistol, hollowpoint bullets, three shots centered on the chest. Here's how the men compare: "Both Kuenzli and Fish were each about 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighed close to 200 pounds." Fish was 57, Kuenzli was 43. Given that both men compare roughly about the same in body, the main difference is the age and the fact that one appeared to be in an agitated state. WFIW, I've seen dog owners overrespond to potential 'threats' to their dogs from others. But this is weak to nonexistent justification for killing the dog owner.