failure

...and that's a bad thing?

Sorry, I got my Johns mixed up :-).

Sure, it might have technical ramifications, like providing a way to jump between galaxies or universes etc - but not a moral one like providing a reason why we should :-).

I'm sorry - did I appeal to authority? I merely appealed to the apparent limits of our knowing. Just ask yourself what type of events might hope to give you certain knowledge on the subject, and you'll realise that even they are likely to remain mostly unconvincing to the rest of humanity. Even Xians acknowledge that: "for we know in part...".

Clifford Heath.

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin wrote (in ) about 'failure', on Sun,

Slippery! All Muslim extremists are not suicide bombers. The leaders wouldn't be so suggestible.

But running out of SBs would be quite a good thing, no?

I also can't agree with intolerance of reasonably-held beliefs, but these are not reasonably-held beliefs. Too often, such beliefs are held *against* all evidence to the contrary - and then they deserve scorn.

Sure it's possible. But it doesn't seem possible to know. I wasn't deprecating the idea, just the thought that we should make our decisions based on such an unsubstantiated rumour, when there are perfectly good bases for decisions without it.

Hello? Did you read what I said? We have exactly one universe to study, so science cannot enter the discussion. However, that one universe shows that for us to be here and able to study it, many remarkable things have happened. The simple became complex, black and white became a rainbow of colours and shades, and diversity, novelty, was the defining characteristic that allowed such complex entities as ourselves to exist. That defining characteristic is one we can espouse, protect and extend, or we can work against it. The difference is not a scientific one, but it may *reasonably* be considered a moral one.

Not in the case of immortality if they believe in the MWI of QM.

Ok, then they can stay "home" and suffer their fate! If they're not going to have any loyalty to the society that offers them a chance to be, then let them not be.

What about the Israeli that has his kid blown up by a homicide bomber? You don't think they have the right of self-preservation? (why did I bother?)

No "Uh". No '?' or '!', either. Anti-semitism is on the rise in Europe. You bastards will do it all over again, likely in my lifetime.

Maybe. There is reason for it. If the fatwas were turned inward to kill the disease, it would go away in an instant. There is no inherent anti-moslem sentiment, at least on this side of the pond. Perhaps on yours, because you are being overrun by uncontrolled immigration...

No real argument, other than you have the power to control immigration. Yeah, I know, so do we. :-(

Jim would be thrown out of a KKK meeting for being intolerant. :(

My experience is equivocal and I don't know of any studies about that.

So where are you headed with that comparison, then?

Jon

And being human.

How do you tell the nice ones from the nasty ones (say to stay away from the latter) before they actually hurt you?

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

Tolerance simply means "putting up with". It doesn't mean liking, being willing to listen to, or not arguing against, or even being polite to.

Then again, some things should not be tolerated at all.

The Americans simply don't 'get it'.

The key is simple. Moslems tend to have a loyalty to 'their kind' rather than to their country of birth.

So, as Moslem born in say Luton will feel that he's being persecuted when the Israelis bomb Gaza.

Grahm

You reckon ?

More Moslems worldwide than Christians.

Graham

Now there's a truth !

Graham

A testament to the US love of guns.

Graham

Uh ? ! ?

Actually I'm beginning to see an anti-Moslem feeling developing that kinda parallels the Anti-Jewish sentiment of the 1920s and 30s that was whipped up in Germany.

This time it's based on more solid ground though.

Graham

A hatred of religion couldn't be rational. There are simply too many different expressions of both organized and individual meaning to the term. Just as a hatred of non-religious would be irrational. And I'll grant both kinds exist.

I've no idea what this means or what evidence you are considering.

Setting aside the fact that I don't know what you meant, I'd expect the practitioners of cults "mostly aren't actual scientists."

I've seen no evidence to define or support any of that one way or another, so there is nothing to deal with.

Jon

I wouldn't be so foolish.

I suspect you've underestimated the value of R though btw.

Graham