kimmy

I think I know what you're getting at, and I can't say I disagree. Surely you guys are kidding. While I realize that mainstream Christians (ie, the sane ones) don't concern themselves with this kind of wackjobbery, the fact that some fringie types believe in this sort of end times prophesied stuff is hardly a guarded secret. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Behind_(series) -k

The US and Britain are not "deciding who leads another country". They are pressuring Musharraf to make Pakistan's upcoming elections legitimate rather than a sham. Was it "undemocratic" when other countries were trying to influence South Africa to reform its elections? Musharraf has exiled the other leaders in Pakistan. As far as I can tell, Bhutto and Sharif are still the leaders of their political parties. It's obvious what the West gains from having a stable Pakistan. The worry, especially in the aftermath of the Red Mosque events, has been that Musharraf is loosing his grip on the country and that chaos could break out. If Pakistan degenerates into external strife, or especially if extremists take over, it will have disastrous consequences for Afghanistan. (and, uh, civil unrest wouldn't be very good for the Pakistani people either.) The hope is that free and fair elections could avert an impending disaster. Elections are scheduled for later this year. By not allowing opposing leaders to participate, Musharraf is inviting the same problems that resulted after Pakistan's *last* elections, which were seen as rigged, resulted in boycotts, and resulted in political gridlock and standoffs afterwards. Would Pakistanis stand for the same thing again, when their patience with Musharraf is already wearing thin? If having somebody who would appease the West was the objective, Musharraf has proven to be pretty handy. (and, as pointed out earlier, he's seen by his people to be more corrupt than his predecessors.) That'll be for them to decide. -k

On the one hand we have a progressive and educated person who stands against barbarism like the Hadood and Zina laws in Pakistan, and is popular amongst the people. On the other hand you have a guy who seized power in a military coup and whose only "legitimate" claim to maintaining power was rigged elections, and is considered by Pakistanis to be more corrupt than Bhutto: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musharraf#Corruption If the US and Britain have interfered in Pakistani politics, it's been by supporting Musharraf despite his shortcomings. I also have to wonder whether you actually comprehended anything in your article past the word "plot". The extent of American and British "plotting" has been to pressure Musharraf to hold free elections. Musharraf grudgingly agrees, provided that the two opponents he fears, Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, aren't allowed back to Pakistan until after the elections. (how "free" are elections where one can select his opponents? What would people think if Dubya Bush arbitrarily decided that Hilary Clinton and Barrack Obama won't be allowed to participate in the 2008 election?) ... ... This sinister "plotting" and "regime change" amounts to the US and Britain using their influence to try to mediate a political dispute within Pakistan with the goal of achieving a legitimate election. ooh, sinister. scary, even. What a creepy website. I'll keep it in mind next time somebody asks what's wrong with Islam. Great example of the kind of people who are afraid of Benazir Bhutto, and example enough of why I hope that she can again be leader of Pakistan. -k

Every time I visit Newsmax, I wind up laughing my ass off at their sponsors. "Women love lean, muscular men. Build a body that will turn heads!" "Men: do you hate rejection by women? Discover Forbidden Attraction Secrets that the LIBERAL MEDIA doesn't want you to know!" "These guys have ladies that are absolutely in love with them! Orexis, the only all-natural male sexual enhancement product!" One gathers that the sponsors suspect Newsmax reaches tubby men who can't get dates and have erectile difficulties. -k {is the liberal media keeping YOU from meeting women? CLICK HERE for an amazing solution that will attract women like catnip!}

That's a fascinating video. Much appreciated. -k

Could you train a dog to fly? No. Why? Because no amount of training can make up for the fact that dogs don't have the ability to fly. You can train scent-hounds to detect cancer in the same way that they can detect drugs. It's within their ability. It's apparently not even very hard: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...dog_cancer.html How accurate? Training doesn't improve a dog's sense of smell. The training is merely to tell the dog which scent you're interested in, and to keep it from getting distracted by other scents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog#Smell How does any of this apply to Oscar? Well, the claim was that some animals have senses that far exceed human senses (and even medical machines in some situations) and that there could be a very simple scientific explanation for what Oscar does. At one point a dog that could detect cancer 90+% of the time would have been considered a Miracle Dog, but as it turns out, there's a very prosaic explanation. Cancer cells generate metabolic wastes with telltale chemical markers that are excreted through the lungs and urine and can be smelled by dogs. hmm. Not miraculous after all. How likely is it that there's an equally boring explanation for Oscar's uncanny ability? Very likely, in my opinion. ...and if it could be proven that there's a god, it would probably prove that there's a god. I don't mean to make light of this, but to prove that Oscar is communicating with spirits, you'd have to prove that there are spirits for him to communicate with, which despite centuries of devoted study has never actually been accomplished. Would you even really want to prove any of this scientifically? It seems to be that the value of faith comes from the fact that it's ...well, faith. Wouldn't it become less special if it could be demonstrated in some kind of experiment? Doesn't the power of your conviction come from the trust you've placed in ideas that are inherently unprovable? To me, it seems like "I trust Jesus" is a far more profound basis for faith than "the magic kitty showed me that spirits are real." -k

Laboured breathing? Rotting flesh? Dogs have been trained to detect cancer using normal scent-hound training techniques. Yes, the kitty providing sympathy and warmth for patients in their final moments is an interesting, unusual, and sort of touching story. But we know of many instances where the exceptionally acute senses of our furry little friends can detect things that are undetectable to human sense. I see a scientific explanation as being a lot more likely than something the supernatural. Animals using their senses to detect human medical conditions has been documented; I'm not aware of any documented cases of animals interacting with the supernatural. Oscar might be a Very Special Kitty, but I'm not prepared to believe he's a Magic Kitty just yet. -k

Shouldn't the predictions and claims of a self-styled psychic be filed under "Moral and Religious Issues"? Or the "Polynewbie Memorial Thread"? I too have had strange visions of Cydonia... -k

A very interesting article. I think everybody recognizes that Musharaff has been an ally of convenience. Surely nobody has been naive enough to think that Western "friendship" with Musharaff has been for any reason other than needing his support to make military operations in the area viable. And I don't think one needs to be a political analyst to see that Musharaff's usefulness as an ally has been dropping dramatically. For some time it has seemed that Pakistan has been providing no help at all with regard to Taliban fighters crossing the border into Afghanistan, creating essentially a safe haven. And as the article mentions, the Pakistan army's storming of the Red Mosque earlier this summer can only help boost the cause of religious fanatics. The question is not why Bush and friends are turning against their "best friend", but rather why they would continue to kiss his ass when he's becoming less useful and more of an obstacle. While the tone of this thread makes this sound like a sinister "regime change" plot, it is the opposite: And while Musharaff denies any political involvement in the arrest warrant, it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that Bhutto's political enemies have been attempting to discredit her for a very long time. -k

How silly for white people to worry about what might happen if they lose political power? What's to worry about? Seriously, what could go wrong? -k

Are you saying that allowing immigration and multiculturalism are the same thing? If so, I'm not sure I agree. (cue "Great American melting-pot" theory.) If not, then I'm not sure what slow birth rates have to do with multiculturalism. (low birth rates and concerns about an aging population are, obviously, justifications for immigration, but are neither for nor against "multiculturalism" as a goal in and of itself.) -k

Well, you did call me "genetically inferior". Presuming to judge a person's intelligence or genetic fitness by examining a characteristic such as hair color, or skin color, or the shape of their cranium puts you firmly in the camp of the most hateful and despicable ideologies of the 19th and 20th centuries. I would think that most people, especially a supposed "progressive," would be utterly ashamed to have said such things. And yet, here you are, proud as a peacock and congratulating yourself on your wit. It speaks for itself, Posit. -k

And again you missed the point. Edmonton's taxes aren't going up because they decided to plunk $3.5 million on a project like this. Edmonton's taxes are going up because they are going ahead with billions of dollars worth of infrastructure projects that should have been started 10 years ago. Is it "chancy"? Probably. Is it a big risk? In the context of the city's revenue base, this works out to about the same as you or I buying a lottery ticket. Probably better uses for the money, unlikely to pay off... but if I don't have enough money to pay my rent on the first, do I blame myself for buying the lottery ticket? Or do I look at the decision to buy the LCD TV and fancy futon? And, if I decide that the TV and futon were reasonable expenditures, why single out the lottery ticket when I also bought a video game, ate out about a dozen times, bought pop and candy and a case of beer that serve no practical function except widening my posterior, went on unnecessary driving trips that cost me extra gas money, etc. What I am trying to express is this: if you want to look at this in terms of the overall tax base and what Edmonton can or can't afford, that's a pointless exercise because in the context of the city's budget, this is an insignificant amount of money. But if you want to look at whether the city can afford frivolous expenditures, why just this isolated one? Cities pony up money for a wide variety of expenses that can be considered frivolous. I'd want to look at the grand total of discretionary spending before I come to a conclusion on whether the city is spending too much money on unnecessary stuff. If this expenditure is part of a budget that in other years might have been spent on buying weird metal sculptures to put in front of city buildings, potted plants to put on medians downtown, putting colorful pennants on light standards, and bringing a mime and interpretive dance festival to town, then I'm all for it. If funding a TV production means no mimes in 2007, I think all Edmontonians will be supportive. I point out Winnipeg's slow growth not to disparage your home or to claim it's been mismanaged in any way.I point out Winnipeg's slow growth because it is a stark contrast with Edmonton's current situation. Edmonton's tax increases are the result of years of underplanning and underspending on infrastructure at a time when the city was growing rapidly. Building infrastructure to try to accommodate this kind of population growth is a challenge that Winnipeg simply does not face. -k

For sure. Even our friendly little forum sometimes has appalling examples of hate speech. -k

Well, you were the one who introduced Winnipeg and it's clever fiscal management to the discussion. And who contrasted Winnipeg's tax freezes with Edmonton's tax increases. I sought to put some perspective on those tax increases: it is the result of explosive population growth combined with the lack of foresight of previous administrations. Edmonton's rapid growth, although due to factors well beyond the control of city council, has placed city council in charge of a situation that Winnipeg simply has not had to deal with. The description "The City That Never Grows" might have been inaccurate, but in comparison to Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal, and Toronto, it's not that much of a stretch, either. How hard is it to freeze taxes when you're in a situation that's very stable? As for contributing money to a production like this... First off, to put the amount of money in perspective, $3.5 million isn't even enough to clean the roads after a winter storm. If it's a mild winter, the city saves 5 times that much in snow removal, or if it's a harsh winter, the snow removal budget might jump by 5 times that. $3.5 million won't even be enough to paint the lines on the road at the Gateway & 23rd Ave interchange. Although it's not a large sum of money in the context of the city budget, that in itself isn't a good reason to spend the money. I would agree that they're hoping that this might stimulate more projects in the future. Might there be more projects in the future? I am somewhat skeptical. Aside from generic suburbia and downtown locations, I can't think of a lot that Edmonton might have to offer a prospective film-maker. The one exception would be Fort Edmonton Park; there might not be another "frontier" type location of this size available anywhere else, especially one inside city limits and minutes from downtown. I suppose the gawdawful Mall might have some possibilities as well; Jessica Alba was in town a while back to film some scenes with the Mall's cute and cuddly penguins. But overall, I can't see Edmonton offering much that film-makers can't find at more established and more accessible locations. But, of course, I know absolutely nothing about the film production industry. I suspect that there's sort of a "critical mass" type thing involved (as it is in many other industries), whereby once you reach some level of activity, the technical expertise and equipment and facilities to maintain that level of activity become established in the city and in themselves become a reason for other productions to consider the city. I am skeptical that Edmonton would ever become any kind of mecca for this sort of thing, but perhaps it can at least grow to the point where some of our wonderfully talented people stay in Edmonton rather than jetting off in search of work. One final point that I would mention is that among Mayor Mandel's priorities is to support and grow the city's arts community. I could see the funding of this project as in keeping with that objective. Trying to build an industry that employs actors and writers and artists, to me, is a more worthy investment in that community than spending the money to bring an art exhibit or a mime festival or buying some weird scrap-metal statues to put in parks. -k

I don't think the fact that Wal-Mart has decided to carry this is proof that there's a market for it. Wal-Mart also carried the "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" game, which proved to be about as popular as dealcoholized beer or Conrad Black Fan Club memberships. -k

Since Winnipeg has had nine consecutive years of tax freezes and is in the process of removing its business tax, perhaps Edmonton could learn a lesson. How big was the tax increase in Edmonton last year? 5%? 8%? Not that long ago, or within my lifetime at least, Winnipeg was as large or larger than Edmonton. And now it's just over half the size? While I doubt very many people in Edmonton are very excited about tax increases, that has to be balanced by the knowledge that at least we finally have a mayor and council that are serious about planning and building rather than just letting the chips fall where they may. It seems to me that prior to Mandel, Edmonton had about 20 years of ostrich-style leadership. First there was Jan Reimer, who was more focused on environmental concerns than getting people where they want to be. She had commendable notions about increasing mass transit usage, which is more effective in a city like Ottawa or Calgary where many jobs are in central locations (ie, downtown offices) which are easily served by public transit, but rather ineffective in for a city like Edmonton which has one of the highest sprawl-to-population ratios of any major city in North America, and where a much lower proportion of people work downtown and a much higher proportion work in dispersed industrial sites and similar areas that are by nature difficult and ineffective for public transit. And then there was Bill Smith, whose entire planning and development program seemed to consist of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." This was true conservatism in action (or conservative inaction, depending on your outlook) as Smith and his councils were reluctant to take on any major project until the need for it punched them in the face. And it resulted in low taxes. However, as the city expanded by roughly 300,000 people during the time Smith was in office, it also resulted in a city that had begun to lack the infrastructure that it needs to accommodate that kind of growth. So what's the deal with Mayor Mandel, and what's with the tax increases? The tax increases are the unavoidable result of almost 20 years of not picking up the tab when it came to transportation and infrastructure planning. The cost of 20 years of ducking the issue finally caught up with us. And Mandel? Personally, I am glad to have a mayor that is willing to take on projects that will meet the demands of the city's rapid growth, rather than a guy who is afraid to act because the voters will get mad if he raises taxes. -k

Sounds like a bit like this topic from just before Christmas: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=7512 And leaves one asking somewhat the same thing: who's actually going to buy this stuff? Wouldn't devout Christians feel that this somewhat trivializes or even ridicules figures from their faith (see Dancer's song...) ...but why would anybody other than devout Christians want this? I am anticipating that the most likely use of a Jesus Action Figure will probably be to star in lurid Youtube videos with Barbie, made by self-styled wits who aren't actually very creative. "WWJD?" indeed. -k

I'd venture to say that contributions made by Whitey to fields such as medicine and agriculture have saved more lives than have been lost in every war in human history combined. European (and later, American) achievements in the arts and sciences over the past ... oh, let's say 320 years (since Newton published "Principia Mathematica") have profoundly changed our understanding of life and the universe, and taken as a body of work, utterly dwarf anything else in human history. And these are to an enormous extent the work of Whitey. What did whitey ever do? Lots of bad things, certainly, but an amazing amount of good and great things as well. This thread? http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6483 Sheer piffle. You and Betsy chatting about hair dye, and Dancer's fond memories of former lovers' muffs. I don't see where it was established that blondes are "to say the least, denied to be genius." Care to run that by me again, RB? Are you of the same views as Posit, regarding the "blonde genetic defect" and "genetic inferiority"? Why don't you tell me about this "denied to be genius, to say the least"? -k

I'll weigh in on this obscure topic at this point.There is no "standard" railway gauge. Spain and Russia do not use the same standard as elsewhere in Europe. This means that international trains must either stop at the border or be adjustable. (I recall once sitting in Siberia for several hours while each wagon was lifted by a crane and its wheels adjusted to cross from China into the Soviet Union.) The question of gauge is really a question of friction and force. Most trains that climb steep slopes (eg. in the Alps or underground in mines) are narrow gauge. In general, the wider the better but wider reduces permissible gradients. I gather you didn't read the supporting articles? The use of a 56.5 inch track in England was, apparently, a "de facto" standard, as the ubiquity of that gauge made the idea of manufacturing railway equipment for any other gauge unprofitable. The use of 56.6 inch track in the United States was not a standard, but it had a significant foothold as much of the early railroad equipment in the US was purchased from England. During the Civil War, using the railway to support the North's war effort encountered difficulties as other track widths were encountered along routes to the south, resulting in supplies having to be transfered by hand between different trains at places where different tracks widths met. Subsequently, the US Congress decreed the 56.6 inch track to be the law of the land. (a "legislated standard".) I find the process by which de facto standards emerge to be interesting. For instance, there's no law anywhere that says Thou Shalt Use Adobe PDF To Disseminate Thine Technical Documents. But from what I hear, every manufacturer of microchips and other electronic components distributes their documentation and specifications in PDF format. I asked an engineer in my life what he'd do if there was a manufacturer who didn't provide PDF documentation, and he said he'd probably just move along to a manufacturer that did. How did PDF become so universal? -k

The original story depends on this link between railroad and horse-drawn wagons: This bit, from the TruthOrFiction article, seems more plausible to me: It sounds like an early example of a "standard", an idea that was probably quite novel at the time (see the accompanying information about US railroads that were incompatible with each other due to different track). The idea that Stephenson chose this spacing for his railway project because he'd already used it for his mine-car project has an element of believability to me. It establishes a link between old technology and new technology, something that the story about the wagons does less believably. -k

I am guessing no.I see this as a reasonable enforcement of a uniform policy. Now one could argue that the uniform policy itself is rediculous but that is a different argument. And this is where I would have to tell the principal to go choke on a dick. Marriage is a deeply revered institution in our society, particularly to Christians, and an engagement ring is a universally recognized symbol of one's commitment to their partner. One can argue that an engagement ring is a religious symbol for the same reason as Muslim headscarfs. If a student were told to remove her engagement ring of risk expulsion, I would hope she dares them to expel her and phones every newspaper in Britain the moment that they do. By the end of the resulting public furor, the principal and any other school board officials who tried to enforce such a decision would be lucky to have jobs. For that matter, I doubt that their stance on this "abstinence ring" issue will be well-received by the public either. In fact, I expect that this will blow up in their faces much like the Festive Halal Chicken fiasco. -k

Does the school have a ban on other rings? Suppose Lydia's friend also wants to wear a ring to school, but it's not an "abstinence ring", it's just an ornament for her finger. Does the school ban that girl's ring too? Or does the ban only apply to the "abstinence ring"? I would say that unless the ban applies equally to all rings, then this strikes me as total BS. If Lydia's ring has been singled out because it is an "expression of religious faith", then the court ruling that it's not a Christian symbol seems to contradict the school's logic. Hypothetically, if a student at this school were engaged to marry, would her engagement ring be exempted from the policy? -k

I have decided not to contribute my observation that while Quebec has the highest level of opposition to the Afghanistan mission among Canadian provinces, Quebec has traditionally also had amongst the highest rates of participation in the military among Canadian provinces. I will decline to mention that Quebeckers who support the Afghanistan mission might be a lot like minority political opinions anywhere else-- Liberal voters in Alberta, for instance-- overshadowed by the size of the majority, but no less committed to their own view regardless. I scoff at the idea of mentioning the impact that this will have on Harper's prospects in Quebec. Or pointing out that this only gives more ammunition to those who consider Harper to be a member of the Western Imperialists club or GW Bush's lapdog. And I will keep it to myself that I think many Quebeckers will be angry with Harper when young Quebecois are killed in the line of duty, as will inevitably happen. Mum's the word on expressing my hope that Stephane and Jack will not attempt to use the death of Quebec soldiers to political advantage. -k

ORLY? Hollus and Mad Michael and the rest say that there's no difference. Didn't you get the memo? There's no such thing as race. It's *all* superficial characteristics. So a certain skin tone might come from parts of Africa? Certain facial features might come from parts of Asia? And? Certain hair-colours come from Northern Europe. What's the difference? And again, you made the claim that I'm genetically inferior based on nothing more than my hair colour. How does that make you feel? Fancy yourself something of a wit? Proud of yourself? By making the claim that someone is "genetically inferior" based on a superficial characteristic, you've allied yourself with some of the most appalling ideas ever devised. Good for you. And here you appear to have missed the distinction between culture and genetics. Personally, yeah, I believe that immigrants ought to join our society by learning our language and accepting the values which this country stands for. But who they marry and procreate with? That's nobody's business but their own. -k