Religions > Atheism > 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat'
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
21 Nov 2005 11:53:28 PM |
| Object: |
'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1647777,00.html
Britain produced some of the world's great physicists but few
schoolchildren want to study the subject now. Simon Singh explains why
we should worry
Tuesday November 22, 2005
The Guardian
We are nearing the end of the "World Year of Physics", otherwise known
as Einstein Year, as it is the centenary of his annus mirabilis in
which he made three incredible breakthroughs, including special
relativity. In fact, it was 100 years ago yesterday that he published
the most famous equation in the history of physics: E=mc2.
But instead of celebrating, physicists are in mourning after a report
showed a dramatic decline in the number of pupils studying physics at
school. The number taking A-level physics has dropped by 38% over the
past 15 years, a catastrophic meltdown that is set to continue over the
next few years. The report warns that a shortage of physics teachers
and a lack of interest from pupils could mean the end of physics in
state schools. Thereafter, physics would be restricted to only those
students who could afford to go to posh schools.
Simon Singh
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/30a31bf34e188462
Physics
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/569e4ef279eca7c9
.
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 12:48:34 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
maff wrote:
That may be so. But it won't change the fact that we still have to pay
to the estates of the victims.
No we don't. They lose. We win. The injuns will got exactly those crumbs
that are thrown at them. The only thing they can hope for is licenses to
run gambling casinos and sell cigarettes tax free to the white-eyes.
That is all the compensation that shall have.
1792 - Chief Walking Crow
1862 - Chief Sitting Bull
1995 - Chief Rolling Dice
But it won't be upto you. It's for the world decide.
Thrrpppppp! The world can go ***** itself. We have nukes.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 03:40:22 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
maff wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
maff wrote:
That may be so. But it won't change the fact that we still have to pay
to the estates of the victims.
No we don't. They lose. We win. The injuns will got exactly those crumbs
that are thrown at them. The only thing they can hope for is licenses to
run gambling casinos and sell cigarettes tax free to the white-eyes.
That is all the compensation that shall have.
1792 - Chief Walking Crow
1862 - Chief Sitting Bull
1995 - Chief Rolling Dice
But it won't be upto you. It's for the world decide.
Thrrpppppp! The world can go ***** itself. We have nukes.
But you don't represent the US anymore than the Confederates.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BruceW" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 02:16:56 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
I'm sure you're sincere when you say, as in previous posts, that
you want the world to be safe for you and for your family. Does
it not concern you that thinking like this:
Thrrpppppp! The world can go ***** itself. We have nukes.
might result in the destruction of that world, and of your children
and your children's children?
-BruceW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 04:19:02 PM |
|
|
BruceW wrote:
might result in the destruction of that world, and of your children
and your children's children?
It might. Then it might not. Let the other nations decide whether they
want to commit suicide. I have no fear from Europe. Cowards and trash
except, perhaps, for the Brits.
Now who has nukes. Russia, France, Britain, China, Pakistan and India. I
am not worried about Pakistan and India. They can only deliver by oxcart
or freighter, so our inland cities are safe from them. That leave
Russia, France, Britain and China. Are any of these nations run by
suicidal fanatics? I doubt it.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 06:44:02 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:19:02 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
BruceW wrote:
might result in the destruction of that world, and of your children
and your children's children?
It might. Then it might not. Let the other nations decide whether they
want to commit suicide. I have no fear from Europe. Cowards and trash
except, perhaps, for the Brits.
Now who has nukes. Russia, France, Britain, China, Pakistan and India. I
am not worried about Pakistan and India. They can only deliver by oxcart
or freighter, so our inland cities are safe from them. That leave
Russia, France, Britain and China. Are any of these nations run by
suicidal fanatics? I doubt it.
Bob Kolker
Only idiots would think that nuclear war on the other side of the
world won't affect them and their children.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Themudo" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 08:02:22 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
BruceW wrote:
might result in the destruction of that world, and of your children
and your children's children?
It might. Then it might not. Let the other nations decide whether they
want to commit suicide. I have no fear from Europe. Cowards and trash
except, perhaps, for the Brits.
I'd like to see if you are this provocative in person. Probably not.
That's why you have to unload all you frustration on usenet
Chico
Now who has nukes. Russia, France, Britain, China, Pakistan and India. I
am not worried about Pakistan and India. They can only deliver by oxcart
or freighter, so our inland cities are safe from them. That leave
Russia, France, Britain and China. Are any of these nations run by
suicidal fanatics? I doubt it.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 08:20:04 PM |
|
|
Themudo wrote:
I'd like to see if you are this provocative in person. Probably not.
That's why you have to unload all you frustration on usenet
You haven't talked to me in person. I detest political correctness in
all of its forms.
I talk like I write. And I am enjoying it. I have waited all my life to
become a curmudgeon. Now here I am.
When 900 years old you are, you may say anything you damn well please.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Themudo" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 08:49:09 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Themudo wrote:
I'd like to see if you are this provocative in person. Probably not.
That's why you have to unload all you frustration on usenet
You haven't talked to me in person. I detest political correctness in
all of its forms.
I talk like I write. And I am enjoying it. I have waited all my life to
become a curmudgeon. Now here I am.
Does this mean that you have become this way recently? Did something
bad happen to you that made you lose your bond with the rest of
humanity? You should get out more, meet some people, talk to them.
You'll find that they're not that bad.
Calm down
Chico
When 900 years old you are, you may say anything you damn well please.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nick J." |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 02:50:02 AM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
maff wrote:
Don't be stupid. US was based on stolen land, near genocide of the
native Americans and the destruction of their language, culture and
religion.
That was then. This is now. The injuns are not getting the land back.
Nevertheless people produce goods and services of value to other people
and some make lots of money doing it and get to keep most of it.
What happened in the 19-th century is over. It can not be changed. Let
the past go.
I will tell what IS stupid. Trying to change what cannot be changed. The
past cannot be changed.
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 05:59:09 AM |
|
|
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 11:28:03 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:59:09 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
You might start with starting to think.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 11:42:02 AM |
|
|
Kate wrote:
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:59:09 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
You might start with starting to think.
I think more in five minutes than you do all day long. I think many
things, but you do not like what I think.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 06:45:03 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:42:02 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Kate wrote:
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:59:09 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
You might start with starting to think.
I think more in five minutes than you do all day long. I think many
things, but you do not like what I think.
No honey. You masterbate with your brain.
There's no evidence in thinking in any post you have made so far. But
give it a try. It's the only way you are going to change your future.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 12:13:08 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
Forget it. There isn't going to be any 1,000 year reich.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 12:49:25 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
Forget it. There isn't going to be any 1,000 year reich.
Who needs a Reich? What we need to do is kill the Bad Guys, then get
back to business as usual.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 06:46:01 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:49:25 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
maff wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
Forget it. There isn't going to be any 1,000 year reich.
Who needs a Reich? What we need to do is kill the Bad Guys, then get
back to business as usual.
Bob Kolker
LOL - quote the man who has no use for morality.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "CreateThis" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 02:03:57 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
... What we need to do is kill the Bad Guys
Careful what you wish for.
CT
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 03:45:56 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
maff wrote:
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
At what point did he say he was trying to change it, or that he even
thought he could? I don't seem to recall that bit of text...
I am interested in changing the future.
Forget it. There isn't going to be any 1,000 year reich.
Who needs a Reich? What we need to do is kill the Bad Guys, then get
back to business as usual.
But you'll be dead by then.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Grumbine" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 11:35:22 AM |
|
|
In article <43ac9de9.224386765@news-west.newscene.com>,
Kate <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 10:36:17 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Stanley Friesen wrote:
And it would be better that they not be able to write a job application
*at* *all*???? How, then, would they get out of poverty?
They could starve to death. That would cure their poverty.
Bob Kolker
That's not a solution for a rational person. What threatens others,
threatens yourself and your own family.
That's the problem with libertarianists. They can't manage to see the
whole picture. All they can see is the tree in front of their face.
He's not a libertarian. He's a genocidalist, plain and simple.
Any group he doesn't like deserves death, and he's quite all right
with doing it by military action as well.
--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 12:09:06 PM |
|
|
Robert Grumbine wrote:
He's not a libertarian. He's a genocidalist, plain and simple.
Any group he doesn't like deserves death, and he's quite all right
with doing it by military action as well.
Not true. Any group that is acting to harm me and mine is the target. It
does not matter what I like or do not like.
I don't like Fundy Christians much but I do not propose to slaughter
them either. Why? Because they are no threat to me and mine.
Islam is the 1200 pound grizzly bear in our parlor. I say slay the beast.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 11:39:15 AM |
|
|
Kate wrote:
That's not a solution for a rational person. What threatens others,
threatens yourself and your own family.
It does? How? I have been ignoring the needy for fifty years and it
hasn't hurt me a bit. If you love and care for your fellow man then by
all means help him out, -but on your nickle-. Keep your hands out of my
pockets!
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 11:23:04 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 12:39:15 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
<nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote:
Kate wrote:
That's not a solution for a rational person. What threatens others,
threatens yourself and your own family.
It does? How? I have been ignoring the needy for fifty years and it
hasn't hurt me a bit. If you love and care for your fellow man then by
all means help him out, -but on your nickle-. Keep your hands out of my
pockets!
Bob Kolker
No, you haven't been ignoring the needy for fifty years. Unless you
haven't been paying your taxes.
But congrats for being a part of the problem and not wanting to share
in all our burden to keep this a peaceful and humane country.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nick J." |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
24 Nov 2005 09:58:32 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Kate wrote:
That's not a solution for a rational person. What threatens others,
threatens yourself and your own family.
It does? How? I have been ignoring the needy for fifty years and it
hasn't hurt me a bit. If you love and care for your fellow man then by
all means help him out, -but on your nickle-. Keep your hands out of my
pockets!
If you don't want to live in a country that employs elements of
socialism in its policies, then leave the US. We'll be sure not to let
the door hit you on the ***** on your way out.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
25 Nov 2005 08:23:34 AM |
|
|
Nick J. wrote:
If you don't want to live in a country that employs elements of
socialism in its policies, then leave the US. We'll be sure not to let
the door hit you on the ***** on your way out.
No. I will stay and fight this stupidity. In case you have not noticed I
have a RIGHT to be here (born and bred in the U.S.A.). I don't need your
permission or anyone else's. My function in life is to tell the king he
is bare ***** naked and to throw sand in the gears.
You seem to like this pinko stinko commie liberal socialism. A true
testament to your character. You pursue the politics of envy and resent
those who are better, smarter, more beautiful and more ambitious than
you are, you pathetic creature. In addition you are ungrateful. You
resent those who feed your face.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick J." |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
27 Nov 2005 02:42:47 AM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Nick J. wrote:
If you don't want to live in a country that employs elements of
socialism in its policies, then leave the US. We'll be sure not to let
the door hit you on the ***** on your way out.
No. I will stay and fight this stupidity. In case you have not noticed I
have a RIGHT to be here (born and bred in the U.S.A.). I don't need your
permission or anyone else's. My function in life is to tell the king he
is bare ***** naked and to throw sand in the gears.
You seem to like this pinko stinko commie liberal socialism. A true
testament to your character. You pursue the politics of envy and resent
those who are better, smarter, more beautiful and more ambitious than
you are, you pathetic creature. In addition you are ungrateful. You
resent those who feed your face.
No, I resent sociopaths like you who couldn't give a damn about their
fellow man. If everyone had your attitude, we would be living in a
constant state of anarchy. I prefer law and order myself.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Grace Haliburton" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 10:50:41 AM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Stanley Friesen wrote:
And it would be better that they not be able to write a job application
*at* *all*???? How, then, would they get out of poverty?
They could starve to death. That would cure their poverty.
Bob Kolker
You'd think I'd have learned by now not to read any topic once this
freako starts posting about politics.
You, sir, are an abomination, a disease, a walking disgrace to
atheists, evolutionists, conservatives, Americans, humans, apes, and
mammals in general. You are deplorable; cold, uncaring, selfish, purely
evil, the kind of filth that ought not to walk the surface of this
Earth. You deserve to suffer the treatment you have advocated for each
and every group you despise. Failing that, you should be taken out and
shot at next sighting.
-Grace
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 11:37:51 AM |
|
|
Grace Haliburton wrote:
You, sir, are an abomination, a disease, a walking disgrace to
atheists, evolutionists, conservatives, Americans, humans, apes, and
mammals in general. You are deplorable; cold, uncaring, selfish, purely
evil,
Oh god! I love it! Don't stop. I gave up compassion and kindness for
lent. Tell me sport what will get you a train ride from Princeton
Junction to Penn Station. Lovingkindess or ten bucks for the ticket?
As to how bad I am, note that I have not stolen my neighbor's purse, nor
defrauded widows and orphans. Nor have I set my neighbor's house aflame.
I -do- no harm. I am not obliged to love my fellow man nor to have kind
thoughts about strangers. It is sufficient (for me) that I care about me
and mine. Now you take care of you and yours. I shall not interfere.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "BruceW" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
23 Nov 2005 06:40:14 PM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
As to how bad I am, note that I have not stolen my neighbor's purse, nor
defrauded widows and orphans. Nor have I set my neighbor's house aflame.
I -do- no harm. ...
But do you bury your *****?
-BruceW
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
24 Nov 2005 09:12:46 AM |
|
|
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Grace Haliburton wrote:
You, sir, are an abomination, a disease, a walking disgrace to
atheists, evolutionists, conservatives, Americans, humans, apes, and
mammals in general. You are deplorable; cold, uncaring, selfish, purely
evil,
Oh god! I love it! Don't stop. I gave up compassion and kindness for
lent. Tell me sport what will get you a train ride from Princeton
Junction to Penn Station. Lovingkindess or ten bucks for the ticket?
As to how bad I am, note that I have not stolen my neighbor's purse, nor
defrauded widows and orphans. Nor have I set my neighbor's house aflame.
I -do- no harm.
no you don't. And it's probalby because you're too scared someone would
kick your ***** because of it. Otherwise it would only be coherent.
If I was to think the way you do then i'd say why should I pay for your
police. It's not my fault you're a wimp
Chico
I am not obliged to love my fellow man nor to have kind
thoughts about strangers. It is sufficient (for me) that I care about me
and mine. Now you take care of you and yours. I shall not interfere.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: 'Keats claimed physics destroyed beauty. Keats was being a prat' |
24 Nov 2005 09:42:06 AM |
|
|
wrote:
no you don't. And it's probalby because you're too scared someone would
kick your ***** because of it. Otherwise it would only be coherent.
That is right. Law enFORCEment is what keeps the law the law.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
