🚀 go-pugleaf

Kurt Lochner (Weasel Remember!) wrote:
> Spamantha reformatted the previous message formatting of:
> 
>>Kurt Lochner (Weasel Remember!) still thought your reformatting sucked rocks:
>>
>>>Spamantha wheedled and pronounced pithy judgements upon:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Kurt Lochner (Weasel Remember!) was laughing again at the expense of:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Sam actually replied in a rational manner to:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Kurt Lochner left the recent edit in place this time:
> 
> ________>
> 
>>>>>>>>Fripp and his truly pompous noodlings, sadly I have...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I shocked!  You actually do know of that group..  And Fripp's
>>>>>>>pomposity, as well..  Not that it isn't well-known, actually..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I've sat through "In the Court of the Crimson King" more than a few times.
>>>>>
>>>>>I thought that _Discipline_ was going to improve the overall output,
>>>>>and _Beat_ had a couple tracks, but _Three of a Perfect Pair sucked,
>>>>>and _People_ was the only track to got me moving w/double trio stuff..
>>>>
>>>>I  confess to losing touch with them until the recent "Islands" offering.
>>>
>>>
>>>_Islands_ recent?  You're way fucked up then.  Fripp's gone way around
>>>the bend since, studying J.G. Bennet, which you might like to get to
>>>know better, as opposed to your fatalistic pseudo-christian beliefs
>>>being spoon-fed to you by the zealots in the "creation science" crowd..
>>
>>http://www.robertfrippunplugged.com/frippfamilygrace.html
> 
> 
> No _Islands_ offerings there..

Just a sane grace for a meal offered.

>>>>Didn't Belew have a few worthy solo efforts?
>>>
>>>Yes, _Lone Rhinocerous_ is one that I have..
>>
>>There we go, good recall.
> 
> 
> And a "music video" called _Big Electric Cat_, and _Sleepless_

Don't watch many of those anymore, too spent a medium.

>>>>>>Frankly if I want something less Gothic though uniquely Brit, my tastes
>>>>>>run to Wishbone Ash' seminal "Argus".
>>>>>
>>>>>Their jams were "longish" but otherwise top-notch stuff..
>>>>
>>>>"The King Will Come" and "Blowing Free" showed the brothers Turner
>>>>at their best.
>>>
>>>_The Phoenix_ was one that attracted my attention..
>>
>>Quite an opus - the "Live Dates" double album had a decent version.
> 
> 
> True story, longish but worth the listen..

The Turner brothers were jam masters, yet anything but sloppy. That kind 
of interplay is sadly lacking from the current abomination that passes 
for "rock".

>>>>>>>>Gad, what'll it be next,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Bruford's "Earthworks", UK w/Holdsworth, Jobson and Wetton,
>>>>>>>Mahavishnu Orchestra, McLaughlin w/Paco del Lucio was good,
>>>>>>>though I'm kinda fond of Vince Guaraldi and Keith Jarrett
>>>>>>>in a similar way..  And don't forget Stravinski..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>McLaughlin handily reinvented himself, who'd have featured an
>>>>>>acoustic alter ego after "Birds of Fire"...
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh, there were hints of it, here and there..
>>>>
>>>>There were.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Early fusion was laden with its Devadipss. Most, like Carlos,
>>>>>>found less obtuse forms of expression.
>>>>>
>>>>>Carlos reinvented himself as well, though from the drink/drugs
>>>>>into a sober new genius, unlike McLaughlin, who finally said
>>>>>goodbye to the eastern esoterica (which is what you're supposed
>>>>>to do any ways, if you can take a hint).  I haven't gone looking
>>>>>up any of Michael Urbaniak's jazz violin work, though I pulled out
>>>>>_Fusion IV_ to dub off a track called _Chinatown_ that flipped me
>>>>>out dozens of years ago..
>>>>
>>>>I wonder what Jean Luc Ponty's been up to of late, or Billy Cobham,
>>>>or for that matter Stanley Jordan.
>>>
>>>You could look that up..
>>>
>>>http://www.ponty.com/
>>>
>>>http://www.billycobham.com/
>>>
>>>http://www.stanleyjordan.com/
>>
>>Neat - all still producing. 
> 
> 
> Yep..

Posit a list of similar fresh talent, your acumen here may be more 
timely than mine.

Bela Fleck spends time in my carousel.

>>Almost makes me want to sign up with my jazz club again.
> 
> 
> I wouldn't go that far yet..

True, the bounty of new must haves must reach a dozen before I'll endure 
the bi-weekly solicitations once more.

>>>>>>Bill Frissel intrigues me these days.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And occasionally I ruminate on what Bill Nelson might have done
>>>>>>with his talent.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not too familiar with their work, rings bells, but no Pavlovian
>>>>>response..
>>>>
>>>>Nelson was the darling of the late 70's move to art rock, his Be Bop
>>>>Deluxe' "Sunburst Finish" remains a treat.
>>>
>>>Hrmm, forgettable, in my view..
>>
>>History appends that he was indeed of merit, I really need to work some
>>of that old vinyl out of storage and revisit the beginnings before
>>sampling the newer material.
> 
> 
> I've been digging out some Iron Butterfly of late, had a tentative
> gig with them back in the "Captain Beyond" days, but my folks had
> the temerity to research their finances and advised not to go..

There's a blast from the past, was it Eric Brann that passed away 
recently? This brings back recollections of Grand Funk and Blue Cheer 
for me.

> Owing the IRS over a 1.5 million has that effect on me...

Caramba!

Did you invent the next great thing, or just incur the wrath of the 
federal Odin? That would make a rock star cringe...

>>>>Bill Frisell (sp) was a Nashville sessions man who branched way out.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.songtone.com/artists/frisell_link.htm
>>>
>>>Now, I'd heard of him, through the musicians union I belong to..
>>>
>>>http://www.billfrisell.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>>Think of him as a less trite Pat Metheny...
>>>
>>>That's pretty freakin' trite, btw..
>>
>>It would be if Frisell had stayed primarily country/relaxed in his
>>thematic choices - as it happens he went far afield and managed to 
>>craft some rather edgy and sonicly complex compositions,[..]
> 
> 
> I got your 'oblong' timing signatures, right here..

Heh, I'd list a few pertinent titles, but I simply jam things in the 
carousel and numbers appear. His last 2 CDs I've enjoyed most.


>>>That's pretty freakin' trite, btw.. I've been more into bass
>>>until recently, so having been accused of being another Jaco
>>>Pastorius around my little town was more of a black mark..
>>>Between Jaco and Jeff Berlin, I'm pretty difficult to be around
>>>sometimes, if you can't play..
>>
>>It's been some time since I thought much about the bass, save for
>>the Peacock variant...
> 
> 
> Saw some of that today w/Jarret, but couldn't find the Koln Concert..

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0000031PE/103-1882512-2111059?v=glance

Some luck here on Amazon - good grief that's luscious imrpov - truly 
moving. I'd forgotten what a virtuoso tour that was.

>>>>auric satisfaction minus the stultifying repetition,
>>>>and he has no problem changing idioms at will.
>>>
>>>Ever heard of Michael Hedges?
>>
>>He is well represented in my collection, I find him an enjoyable road
>>trip companion. The same holds for Peter White.
>>
>>And too, there's  Bob Culbertson, playing a variant of the Chapman
>>stick, whose work I enjoy, though more so in person than on CD, where
>>the recordings fall short of the richness one gets in a good intimate room.
> 
> 
> You might like some of the recent Krimson, Tony Levin on Stick..

Ah yes, another master of that intruiging device, it's as mesmerizing to 
watch as listen to.

>>>>>>>>Fairport Convention, the Pentangle, Mussorgsky revised?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Keith Emerson did that, though there are several other compositions
>>>>>>>that most folks have never even heard of that were much better in
>>>>>>>that vein,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I trust so, his keyboard work was, for the most part, ham fisted, imo.
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree (shocked?) though I did catch the abortive _The Score_ tour
>>>>>lacking Yngvie Maalm-something, and there was room for quite the
>>>>>acoustic piano w/midi accompaniment that was breath-taking..
>>>>
>>>>Good to know that freed of the electronics he could evince some nuance.
>>>
>>>I guess you're also not familiar with what MIDI is..
>>
>>You said accompaniment, was he not playing acoustic piano then?
> 
> 
> Yes, but it has MIDI outputted to several Mac's on-stage..
> I didn't get to see that entire setup, but effect was subtle..

Hmmm...subtle beats ham fisted imo.

>>>The slight touch of chimes on one piece was quite a joy,
>>>Greg looked over and asked if he'd like to play another one, just
>>>for grins..  I guess you're also not familiar with what MIDI is..
>>
>>Musical interactive digital interface - or what we used to call 
>>rythmn boxes, no?
> 
> 
> Uhhnnn, nooooo, it's advanced quite a bit now, with 'virtual' synth
> technologies (VSTi) emulating Mellowtrons, Hammond B3's and many
> of the early Sequential Circuits, Moog and Korg synth designs..
> 
> If you have to ask why, you wouldn't understand..

So it also encompasses the effects boards that guitarists use now in 
lieu of the old stomp boxes, echoplexes, etc?

>>>>Whilst I have been wowed by David Mamet's early work, this once
>>>>hidden E Street talent has never let me down:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.davidsancious.com/
>>>>
>>>>A trip back in time to "The Wild, the Innocent, and the E Street
>>>>Shuffle" is all any ear need catch.
>>>
>>>Standard stuff these days..
>>>
>>>I've gone back to 12-string of late, might have to pick up some
>>>of the early Leo Kotke, already working on Joni Mitchell and CSN&Y..
>>
>>Kotke's "Pamela Brown" is on my top ten list of all time [..]
> 
> 
> _Morning Is The Long Way Home_, 'nuff said..

Ayup.

>>And his take on "8 Miles High" still churns with vitality.
> 
> 
> I can imagine how he played it, but not his singing, please..

I'm with you there, fortunately he concentrates on the riffs.

>>>Though, these next pieces have my interest as well..
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>and I've just recently picked up on the soundtrack for
>>>>>>>_Brother Bear_ with scores and direction from Phil Collins as well
>>>>>>>as Eddie Jobson, who wrote the theme to _Young and the Restless_..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So yes, Fripp's a bit of a pompous ass, but you can't argue with
>>>>>>>his technical prowess, just the way he's extended the whole "Larks
>>>>>>>Tongue In Aspic" and "Fractured" themes into meaningless dirges..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh that brings to mind some old memories...
>>>>>
>>>>>Henh!  Quit telling on yourself..
>>>>
>>>>Pity they're not appreciating assets...
>>>
>>>Well, I'd recommend not pushing your 'faith' upon anyone
>>>but yourself, as it's considered 'scripturally sound' to
>>>practice such in private, in many cultures, except for ours,
>>>it seems..
>>
>>Faith is merely a subject divider, no specific dogma was evinced.
> 
> 
> Yes, you 'evinced' a fallacious 'black-or-white' argument..

You may read it thusly. I don't.

>>Would that science be any less forcefully fed in our society than religion.
> 
> 
> Fuck your religion, 

I haven't specified 'my" religion - so it'll be a hard tail to seat...

> science is but simple observations, uncluttered
> by untestable beliefs, it is unencumbered in its "art" by belief in
> that it tests what you know, not relying upon 'beliefs'..

Creative science however encompasses the same leap of faith in many 
instances as epistemology. At some point one leaves the hard and fast 
and makes a reach.

>>>You Straussians are quite the piece of work,
>>>fucked up, but you really have to work at it..
>>
>>I'm no strict adherent of Strauss, his antipathy for democracy 
>>leaves me cold. Now you can counter that his impact is broadly 
>>represented in the neoconservative movement, [..]
> 
> 
> And what about the 'millenialarists'?  You seem to be one..

No more so than an apocalypsist - grand denouements like these are only 
ever graded with any success sseveral hundred years hence.

>>You're spot on with one parry though, I decry liberalism as a more
>>costly form of collective nannying than our social structures can 
>>bear with any lasting efficacy.
> 
> 
> The costs of not being "liberal" have a tendency to add up quickly..
> Check the recent budget, deficits and dollar-exchange rates..

We've sen those balloon as well under liberal stewardship, it's really a 
question of where the spending occurs and for what end. I will say that 
the current deficits, despite a perceived "healthy" economy are abrupt 
in their intensity and one hopes do not presage a larger global economic 
re balancing. Dear me, I got a bit apocalyptic there now didn't I...

>>>>>>You're way too fussy,
>>>>>
>>>>>You left out 'crude', 'rude' and 'boisterously vulgar'..
>>>>
>>>>Blast, and ruin the party by passing out all the favors
>>>>before the punch has been puked in?
>>>
>>>Henh!  I don't drink, sorry..
>>
>>No reason you ought be!
> 
> 
> Yeah, I don't miss it, nor the whiney drunks, and still make it
> out to jam-sessions and back with no worries about a DUI..
> 
> Lost about 25-30lbs too, feels good to me..

Well the real gift is one you gave yourself, those tend to be the best 
kind anyway.

>>>>>>though quite in character both musically and scientifically.
>>>>>
>>>>>I am awake, what you are, isn't.  Deal with it as you may..
>>>>
>>>>I suspect your hyper-literal wakefulness may be as restive
>>>>a state as you perceive my adjudged paucity of scientific
>>>>grooming to be.
>>>
>>>Nope, I do not worship graven images, I am awake, in the Zen
>>>sense of the word.
>>
>>Your literal wakefulness, left unbridged by sleep,
> 
> 
> You still do not comprehend.  I sleep just fine, meditate whenever
> I feel disquieted, and do not practice any dis-eases of body/mind..
> 
> Look at what I said, in full context, please.. 

Oh I am, I'd not have featured you a meditator however. The breath 
counting varietal perhaps?

My larger point was that a single-minded focus on the literal leaves one 
hemisphere atrophied, though I can see now from your zeal for ear candy 
that sustenance is ongoing.

>>>Nope, I do not worship graven images, I am awake, in the Zen
>>>sense of the word. I do not chafe much at religious trappings,
>>>just the fools that think I *MUST* believe as they do, which
>>>I don't.
>>
>>I'm selling no specific variant here.
> 
> 
> You're smelling of false 'black-or-white' syllogisms..

Oh?

>>>Nope, I do not worship graven images, I am awake, in the Zen
>>>sense of the word. I do not chafe much at religious trappings,
>>>just the fools that think I *MUST* believe as they do, which
>>>I don't.  You've falsely presumed that being a scientist just
>>>automatically disqualifies me from having a 'religious belief'
>>>in the way that you can understand it.  That's false and full
>>>of misleading ways to deceive yourself into thinking that you're
>>>the only one who understands how to worship a deity..
>>
>>You've presumed that rote worship is the sole manner of successfully
>>interacting with the Creator. 
> 
> 
> In most cases, that seems to be what I've observed, not much
> for that myself, don't need a crutch either..

Direct access is to my view preferable, yet the introduction of ritual 
and repetition has its own benefits depending on one's place on the 
board and personality.

>>You've presumed that rote worship is the sole manner of successfully
>>interacting with the Creator. Does that presage a literal religious
>>propensity or were you merely employing the traditional idiomatic 
>>terms to portray what you feel my aims to be?
> 
> 
> You've 'pre-judged' myself and others according to a dogmatic
> "conservative" systemic 'belief', the patterns are unmistakably 
> narrow-minded and utterly without consideration that someone 
> might not share your own 'dogma"..

Again I've specified no personal dogma, though I draw the line at 
atheism, which I find offensively shallow and overly self-important.

>>>Oh, you're a straussian neoconservative pseudo-scientist..
>>>You're like that guy that was soliciting suicides..  *>LOL!<*
>>
>>Hardly, but I'll warrant that unbridled liberalism is at first 
>>economic and later spiritual suicide.
> 
> 
> I remain unconvinced of your conjecture..

Well I suppose you would. Yet a look at older socialist nations paints 
my perceptions. Or perhaps I merely intensely prefer *this* model we're 
hammering away on.


>>>>>>How many species might one encounter grooving with a Pict anyway?
>>>>>
>>>>>Several..  Aye an' a bit of Mackeral settler rack and ruinran it doon..
>>>>
>>>>Heh, 7 to be precise..all furry...
>>>
>>>Better check that ax Eugene, it's "several", not seven..
>>
>>Correct you are, Hounds baehhh!
> 
> 
> A roar he cried frae the bottom of his heart that I would 
> nay fall but as dead, dead as 'a can be by his feet..

Awesome cite, I pict it up right away...

>>>>>>>Oh, and speaking of "meaningless dirges", weren't you the psychotic
>>>>>>>whiner that was bitching about finding/putting together fossil
>>>>>>>remnants from a primate(s) together to resemble a human ancestor?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just citing the known, and decrying the use of whole cloth or femur to
>>>>>>flesh out the unknown...
>>>>>
>>>>>Hrmm, I can see your point, but the reassigning behind it, though not
>>>>>readily apparent, is sound enough to pass peer-review with consideration
>>>>>towards several other forms/sub-species that appears to correlate well
>>>>>enough that DNA testing, when possible, along with dating technologies,
>>>>>puts together a time-line and 'family tree' of sorts that seems to hold
>>>>>up well to regular scrutiny.
>>>>
>>>>Meaning that it's of less than trial-tested solidity.
>>>
>>>You aren't qualified to make that call, pseudo-scientist..
>>
>>I've qualifications enough to parse the material in play 
>>and spot some obvious reaches.
> 
> 
> But, not having a the formal background, which is readily apparent to
> myself, and others, you've falsely resorted to some 'reaches' yourself..

I confess to no more than 2 bouts with anthro and that paleo trapped in 
strat and sed, but I feel at no particular disadvantage in shaking loose 
what seem to be some rather broad leaps of fossil record as presented.

>>>>Hardly even convictable, had Lucy, or even her paleontological
>>>>suitors purloined a lesser primate's drumstick for sustenance...
>>>
>>>Drumstick?
>>
>><g>
> 
> 
> Where were those timbales, did you say?

Bit of a rim shot actually....

>>>Bullshit..  You wouldn't know, and are again dishonestly presuming
>>>to know the underlying background material, that you don't..
>>
>>I know the reaches are evident.
> 
> 
> Leave it to the professionals, and don't quit your day job..

Hadn't planned to, but they've yet to sell me the full bill.

In fact I much prefer the more observable Darwinism our species has 
shown in the past thousand or so years. There's a premise that man, like 
other lost species, is exhibiting a movement toward gigantism - one 
which it's said is a clear sign of a species under great stress, one 
perhaps in it's climax run.

Comments?

>>>Not King Crimson, not Pink Floyd, nope, you're fucked up..
>>>
>>>Now I see why..
>>
>>I retired my Floyd and Crimson vinyl to storage, interesting memories,
>>but I'm more interested in classic Brubeck and some of the acoustic
>>guitarists cited these days.
> 
> 
> Don't blame you bit there, though there is something to be said
> for Steve Howe..

I saw him somewhere the other day, looking indeed his age, yet playing 
with all the goods.

Time, the lathe Durk and Sandy never quite visibly slowed for us...

>>>>>Hrmm, I can see your point, but the reassigning behind it, though not
>>>>>readily apparent, is sound enough to pass peer-review with consideration
>>>>>towards several other forms/sub-species that appears to correlate well
>>>>>enough that DNA testing, when possible, along with dating technologies,
>>>>>puts together a time-line and 'family tree' of sorts that seems to hold
>>>>>up well to regular scrutiny.  Admittedly, one can oftener see the desire
>>>>>to believe, on the behalf of such studies, rather than the underlying
>>>>>work that the more recent studies are built upon, but to pick just one
>>>>>'site' of excavation to question the entire work, or even suggest an
>>>>>alternative scenario, such as a continental 'flood' is not going to be
>>>>>taken seriously by many, if at all..
>>>>
>>>>So you found the larger campus to be less than cozy when unveiled?
>>>
>>>Excuse you, what sort of rhetorical question is that?
>>
>>Simple - the narrow argument over paleontological completeness at best
>>hints at something we'll have a far harder time comprehending, 
> 
> 
> I doubt that entirely, just like recent physics studies, it build
> upon the continued testing of evidence as proof, such that new
> hypothesis' have some kind of framework to build a new 'theory'
> against, using or disproving what suit the latest observations..

They can assemble and catalog till the cows come home and I remain 
unconvinced that hominid/human evolution will ever be successfully and 
completely put into a pithicene continuum.

>>and an equally unsuccessful one documenting - that our origins 
>>are most likely engineered; and if true, [..]
> 
> 
> And if true, one's religion would still be a matter of personal
> convictions and beliefs, not a 'science' in any way, shape or form..

In that religion, like politics is a chapter, not a single book?

> That you should suggest such tells me that you're only 'cherry
> picking' your 'data' to suit your prejudged opinions/beliefs..

I think we're all inclined to an extent to have a lens of perception, 
how else does one embark on any hypothesis and test it?

> That's the difference between us, as I don't try to 'prove'
> that any or everything is 'engineered' by a 'creator', what
> it is, is, and who are you to try and predefine a manifestation
> of any such 'creator' to begin with?

I'm me.

Or perhaps I'm a created analog of me testing a boundary between the 3D 
solid and extra dimensional.

> It seems as if you're poisoning the well that you're trying to draw
> the details from to justify your subjective beliefs, without any
> regard for what actually has disagreed with your conclusion in
> search of a data point..

Of course it would sem that way to _you_ that's why you're not me! Yet 
we're temporally coexistent, thus there must be some degree of shared 
reality.

>>>>Rest assured that with examination and familiarity [..]
>>>
>>>Oh, you're back to that 'great deluge' of which there's
>>>no record of, in any fossil records..  If anything, you'd
>>>see more droughts than floods, though I suppose you never
>>>bothered to look up Velikovsky, as I suggested earlier..
>>
>>Actually some years back I perused the Russian's premise, 
>>amongst others like Hapgood's, in John White's "Pole Shift".
> 
> 
> I don't see 'pole shifts' to be of any provable consequences..

I see magnetic signatures, I see plate tectonics, I see broad 
inundations. Does this mean I see all as linked to one mechanism? No. I 
also see a rapid decline in our magnetic field. Perhaps we'll have a 
chance to see if it's climate, asteroid, chandler wobble, or none of the 
above that flips the poles this time.

> 
>>>Nope, you're being dishonest..  Why am I not surprised..
>>
>>Am I?
>>
>>You're unlikely to have the divinational acumen to make that judgment.
> 
> 
> Henh!  I'm far more objective, by practice and training than yourself..

You equate objectivity to raw intuitive power?

>>>>>>>That's contemptible bovine excretia, on your lame behalf, and it
>>>>>>>indicates just how little you know about the fossil record of the
>>>>>>>species that flourished before Neanderthal Republicanass'..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I know this, our fascination with claiming primate ancestry is one
>>>>>>Ward Churchill away from ludicrous.
>>>>>
>>>>>I see, so you don't especially see eye-to-eye with Dr. Churchill's views
>>>>>on how we've inculcated acts of terrorism on our homeland.  Most of you
>>>>>right-wing so-called "conservatives" wouldn't want to own up to that,
>>>>>having supported all sorts of illegal activities, including Iran-Contra..
>>>>
>>>>Neither here nor there, [..]
>>>
>>>But, you mentioned it as an aside, now you brush it off..
>>
>>That I do, inconsequential in the long run.
> 
> 
> You brought him up, so you've obviously got a stake in the outcome..

At this point I haven't all that many stakes at all.

>>>>I suspect our cumulative foreign "aid" far eclipses any weight
>>>>of military meddling we might, in final analysis, be held as
>>>>less than puritan.
>>>
>>>"less than puritan"??  That's a quaint way to put off the way
>>>our current misdeeds are catching up to us, having propped up
>>>dictators, helped both sides to wage war against each other
>>>and profited from most of it, including WWII in Prescott Bush's
>>>day..  And, you think it's the end of days..  What a cop-out..
>>
>>I'm not willing to state that this IS the "end of days", 
>>though hearty arguments can be made for the scenario.
> 
> 
> So, as I've stated, you do share some of the 'millenialarists' 
> belief system..  You're worshipping at the altar of a death-cult..

Acknowledging that there is a body of study and predictions isn't the 
same as buying the whole enchilada. I plan on being around long enough 
to check the veracity of the Mayan calendar at the very least!

>>Additionally our interaction with "dictators" is par for a dodgy course.
>>What other kind of leaders do you find in the immediate vicinity anyway?
> 
> 
> Self-centered amateurs, with little concern for the people that
> they are supposed to govern, and be of beneficial good to..

Fair enough, I concur.

So it's a bad crop from which we try and pick the least damaged fruit.

>>That we worked hard to keep communism from gaining a toehold is no 
>>bad thing. That we still face military meddling from the former 
>>Soviet Union in Syria and Iraq today handily proves the need[..]
> 
> 
> *>LOL!<*  The former "Soviet Union" is of little consequences,

Nope.

Their stray nuclear material and continued weaponry sales is a concern.

> excepting for the petroleum products that they would like to 
> exploit, so don't tell me that this "Iraq" thing isn't about 
> an 'oiligarchy'.  That's "meddlesome" as well..

I'd sooner invade Alberta if that was the sole metric, but no, I 
certainly wouldn't say it's not about oil, in fact I'm pleased we make 
some play before China sucks the sands dry.

> And, don't get me started on Iran-Contra..

Hadn't planned to.

>>>>>There's more to this Iraq (and an oil slick) than meets the eye,
>>>>>and W. Bush would do well to bury the matter well before the end
>>>>>of his term, or there will be a severe price to pay for him and
>>>>>his corporate cronies..  The sins of the father will be visited..
>>>>
>>>>The trail is deep and black, but Balfour's tar pit [..]
>>>
>>>I see, so your head really *IS* buried up your ass again..
>>
>>I see, you deny the British culpability in all this?
> 
> 
> Not at all, and it's typically 'imperialistic' of them,
> though I apologize that the reference didn't make sense
> at first..

Fair enough, and now we're seen as the "lead" - though I rather think 
that's square dance.

>>It's rather obvious who drew the boundaries, and too that 
>>we were at best late guests in the process.
> 
> 
> Nah, I don't think so, this all goes back to Nixon..

It goes back a lot further than that.

>>That we're last at the table in indeed unfortunate, [..]
> 
> 
> Doubtful that, and presuming "environmentalists" to be "whackos"
> and anti-technology is just way too far over the top..

Oh pish. They yank the media out at every new drill site, scream that 
coal must be stopped, rail against nuclear, cringe over caribou while 
the Arctic melts off.

They're little more than Luddite obstructionists anymore.

>>>>>Let's hope that you will begin to open your eyes to the possibility
>>>>>that you're wrong to think that other cultures, thousands of years
>>>>>older than our own, will convert, seemingly overnight, to our ways
>>>>>of living.  That is both cowardly and foolish, and our enemies will
>>>>>play upon that as a weakness.
>>>>
>>>>I suspect that you might miss the corrosively pervasive decay of
>>>>our own consumer culture, one that has marginalized the family[..]
>>>
>>>I've already put that aside,
>>
>>Have you now?
> 
> 
> True story..

No bad thing then.

>>And to what fate have you relegated it?
> 
> 
> None, no 'preconceived notions' have to exist for me..

Oh what the heck, live dangerously, have at...

>>>I've already put that aside, despite your dishonest conjectures
>>>to the contrary, and I suspect that it is you that will have to
>>>endure the terrors that your beliefs seem to dictate for you,
>>>despite the fact that you're completely wrong.  Nobody's going
>>>to tolerate you and yours pissing away this nation..
>>
>>There will be no nation to spar over if we terminate the 
>>very fuel it runs on - cogitate on that for awhile.
> 
> 
> Then we'd best get to working on 'renewable energy' sources,
> instead of sentencing them in the corporate boardrooms to
> "death by committee"..

I suspect that while you'd like to take it straight out of the P&L realm 
it's still sequestered there, though there is promise in the recent 
hydrogen funding. And too we've a wind power initiative here that passed 
as well. Small steps.

>>>Better get used that fact, your beliefs, apocalyptic and all,
>>>will become a self-fulfilling nightmare and no one seemed to
>>>be able to talk you out of your emotionally-driven miasma..
>>
>>You label me as apocalyptic,
> 
> 
> I have every indication that this is so, by your own admission..

Recognizing the premise and noting its not-quite applicability through 
history leads you to that conclusion?

>>You label me as apocalyptic, yet history records that at any 
>>given moment, from Flanders to Fatima mankind has found call 
>>to expect the end. I'm content then to note, so far so good...
> 
> 
> I trust that you say "thank you" in your prayers often..

Probably not enough frankly - I'm more of a focused intent petitioner.

>>>>>Let's hope that you will begin to open your eyes to the possibility
>>>>>that you're wrong to think that other cultures, thousands of years
>>>>>older than our own, will convert, seemingly overnight, to our ways
>>>>>of living.  That is both cowardly and foolish, and our enemies will
>>>>>play upon that as a weakness. Rest assured that they take a 'blood
>>>>>feud' way more seriously than a simple Hatfield-McCoy scenario, and
>>>>>having gone to school with several varieties of these cultures, I
>>>>>do know what I'm talking about from first-hand experiences, not just
>>>>>some talking gas-bag on the radio or television..
>>>>
>>>>Their primitive blood wars will be safely channeled into
>>>>controllable models like GTA -San Andreas and swiftly marketed[..]
>>>
>>>Bullshit.
>>
>>Hardly.
> 
> 
> They're onto how they've been manipulated by their own, by us..

Yet the culture craving is unquenchable yet.

>>They crave our pop culture, and our culture has a corrosively 
>>addictive cycle of behavioral modifications.
> 
> 
> But, it's still the 'corrosion of conformity', none the less..

That it is!

Or at least "traditional" social conformity, for I see it as replacing 
institutions with pop iconography and thus casting psychographic and 
demographic peer set conformity.


>>>>Simply put, no one stands a chance.
>>>
>>>*>LOL!<*  So, that means you don't have to do a thing, it's all
>>>foretold/preordained and there's nothing to be done about it?
>>>
>>>You're really fucked up if you're buying into that death-cult..
>>
>>It means that for the present the lure of goods and liberties 
>>will easily outweigh narrow Islamic fundamentalism - trust me.
> 
> 
> You know any Muslims?  Just wondering..

I do.

They prefer the term, "Persians"...

>>Whether the eventual hybrid is viable is another mater, though almost
>>anything would be an improvement over the extant Renaissance deprived
>>wailing that pervades the region.
> 
> 
> So it would seem, but it still will not change overnight..

Grief no, it make even take a full generation!

Now that is historically rapid.

>>>>Far better to be the host than the recipient, at least we can
>>>>claim parental immunity.
>>>
>>>Spamantha, you're starting to sound irrational now..
>>
>>Not for a moment, we authored this pop culture, to that extent 
>>we best understand and can draw back from it's propensity to 
>>break down *all* social barriers.
> 
> 
> The 'barriers' are imagined, and marketed as well..

Oh it's a matrix all right, and a damned attractive one, don't you 
think? Glittery, hip, textured, responsive, showy, quite a holodeck 
we've fallen into.

>>>>I rather preferred our overt sparring Kurt,
>>>
>>>*>LOL!<*  You call what you're writing "sparring"?  You've
>>>returned yet again, completely unarmed to a battle of wits..
>>
>>And you've slid back into delusions of grandeur, 
> 
> 
> Not at all.  You're the one that's still cutting off the sentences
> of replies that do not suit your agenda of evincing your beliefs
> in many other threads that I can point to right now.  

Am I?

You seem to be the editor in this round.

> This is the
> same behavior that I pointed out in your previous excursion into
> 'creation science/intelligent design', which I found to be delusional,
> arrogant and utterly without merit..  You countered that as a 
> scientist that I had no working familiarity with religious beliefs,
> which I can easily disprove, but find that discussing such to be in
> direct contradiction to those beliefs..

Before crediting you with any religious plaudits, let me at least say 
that I'm not qualifying your views exclusively by how much chapter or 
verse you can cite, that would be narrow and trite.

Rather my suggestion was that you came off as being overly "hard 
science" on most responses, that there was a quantifiable dearth of 
respect for or interest in the more esoteric nuances of the subject 
matter at hand and a tendency to grade it only on the scientist's scale 
of perception.

>>And you've slid back into delusions of grandeur, though I suspect 
>>they offer comfort in lieu of any real compact of ideas.
> 
> 
> You've again falsely 'assumed' that which you cannot possibly know,
> and use it to prop up a 'straw-man' argument to knock over when you
> cannot assail the ideas and opinions that I've expressed..

You've made your own fallacious presumptions of my beliefs so I'm 
calling this a push.

>>>>this has degenerated into a more communicative dialog than
>>>>I normally prefer in this medium.
>>>
>>>I can understand why, you have some really fucked-up beliefs,
>>>spawned by a belief in the Straussian "neoconservative" mind-set,
>>>and you've really told on yourself this time..
>>
>>Have I?
> 
> 
> Yes..  You've actually behaved rather nicely, in that we're sharing
> not only our opinions about politics and religion (strange bedfellows
> those two), but found more a pleasant topic in music to agree upon
> for the most part.  There was an unspoken trust that we could carry 
> that over and back to our discussion (and cussin') about how teaching
> religion alongside science was a contradiction in terms, if not facts..

I'll walk that bridge with you for the present, and it was nicely 
described as well.

Music, the soulful form of math imo, at least creates an adhesive 
between cultures, so that's as covalent a bond as we might hope for now.

>>Philosophy is not, for me at least, a prison of dogmatic solidity, 
>>one can pick and choose.
> 
> 
> The study of sciences is not a matter of "dogmatic solidity", but more
> of an open-ended discussion of a cohesive wholeness, and that has arisen
> only in the past thirty or so years that I can say I've experienced,
> Jimi Hendrix aside for the time being..

Well as long as these don't turn out to be "castles made of sand"...and 
I accept that proper science is or can be eternally self-revisional.


>>>Look at the bright side of this, tomorrow you'll wake up in the
>>>same world as today, the suffering of the world will not be aided
>>>one bit by your charming but antiquated beliefs in an apocalypse,
>>>and you think that you'll not be held responsible when they start
>>>passing out the kool-aide..
>>
>>You and O'Reilly really have it in for the wrong manufacturer.
> 
> 
> *>LOL!<*  O'Reilly is a poisonous sugary confection, in my opinion,
> so in his case he's just 'projecting'.  Me, I'm a bit more tart..

Malic or ascorbic?

>>It was Flav-Or-Aid, grape in fact, and still in production lo 
>>these many years later.
> 
> 
> Still, we have "jim Jones'" all over the place, leading people
> astray with some very twisted belief systems, all supposedly to
> be from God..

Or some cometary variant...yes...

>>As for the Apocalypse, time enough to deal with that should it 
>>occur, not "when"...
> 
> 
> No "if" there?

I'll go that with you as I've but this reality to measure with, and I 
plan on seeing it through to power down.

>>>Fine, good riddance to you and your prejudiced pronouncements..
>>>
>>>--If, on the other hand you decide to wake up from that nightmare..
>>
>>To what, Swedish socialism?
> 
> 
> Nope, begone corporate cronyism and monopolistic self-destructive
> mergers, megastores that stock imported crap and get back to people
> simply helping people take care of the planet..

Manifesto-like in tone.

Prevent a market from adjusting and it becomes impacted.

As for taking care of the planet, don't you think that we're a tad past 
the real carrying capacity to do more than salvage regional bioreserves?

> --"If it's not Scottish, it's crr-rr-rr-ap!"  *>chuckling<*

What was it Lowell said to Dewey, or was it Louie?