> HP David M said:
> [some stuff about phylocoders that I forgot to comment on last message]
> Yeah, I know that phylogenic ranking is completely arbitrary.  It sounds
> better though, to say "the family Formicornidae" than "that one group of
> dinosaurs".

Why not just "Formicornidae"?

> Besides, the cladogram we've been using to keep track of our critters is
> based upon that of HP T. Mike Keesey.  That is to say, it needs a name
> for every grouping.

No. He doesn't name every node, by far. That's completely unnecessary.

> I'm going to split the birds out of just "Aves" and give each family
> ("-formes" grouping)

These are (traditionally) the orders. Families all over zoology = ICZN must
end in -idae. :-)

> name for hadrosaurs?  Hadrosauria?  Hadrosauroidea?  Hadrosauroididae?
> (I think I made that last one up, but you get my point)

Hmmm....I think if 19th century taxonomists were around in SPEC they'd
place the duckbills in their own order (Hadrosauria) with Ungulapedia
as a suborder. The two extant iguanodontian (hadrosaurs, neodryosaurs)
lineages have probably diverged so much since the Mesozoic that they'd
give order-level status to both.

Hey!!! You thought you got me back for the giant flightless leafnosed
bat didn't you! Well...just take a look at this giant killer
anglerfish!:

http://www.geocities.com/dbensen2002/Spec/Phobotyrannusrubustus.html

er....ceratoids are deepsea anglerfish.

Cheerio
Ozgod out!

>>Once again, comments from anyone welcome (including you spec
people!).<<
Hell, I haven't given a thought to earthside politics since I got shoved
through.  Don't get me started about this guy, Serkas, though.

Dan

--- In DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads@y..., "David Marjanovic"
<david.marjanovic@g...> wrote:
> Anyone tired of this discussion? Please tell, and I'll move offlist.

Same here.  But, I suppose this is a "banned threads" list...:-)

> > I'd rather spend taxpayer money on defense than on funding
unnecessary
> > programs and studies :-)  At least defense has an immediate and
> > visible purpose...which I see as a method by which to deter
instead of
> > to fight per se.
>
> Fine, fine. Just some parts of defense are "unnecessary programs and
> studies".

Oh, certainly.  A big problem that many see with the new Bush defense
budget is that it harkens back to the Cold War.  I don't know enough
about it comment, but if true, that would be a bad thing!

> > I'm undecided on missile defense.  If the
> > science is sound, then good.  If it can protect the U.S. against
rogue
> > missiles, then good.
>
> There is no science in it, and it can't protect anything. It's
ridiculously
> easy to overwhelm, to trick, ... even assuming every counter-attack
missile
> would hit (LOL). And of course assuming that a threat by missiles is
real.

The current science is, well, faulty.  And, yep, the current system
wouldn't do much (only a stupid terrorist or nation could get tripped
up by it).  But, if there is the possibility for any reasonable
defense, then I say have at it.

> The threat of the future, no, present is the lone terrorist with a
suitcase
> bomb (a nuke, I mean), a test tube with a few billion *Bacillus
anthracis*,
> a plastic bag with sarine, or a hijacked plane. The ability to kill
lots of
> people is no longer the monopoly of states, rogue or otherwise.

Yep.  The entire missile defense system also harkens back to the Cold
War days.  IMHO, the U.S. (and other nations) need to be much more
concerned about what you mention: individual terrorists or terror
groups (both foreign and domestic).

> > The one good thing about missile defense is that
> > the Russians aren't really against it.  Sure, they sent out a
> > declaration denouncing the U.S., but that was basically for show.
>
> Actually, I think Putin is laughing to this day. "If they really
want to
> pump billions and billions of tax $ into such a theater, then it's
no use
> trying to stop them."

I can picture it :-)


> > Well, he was injured a few months ago in a horrific car crash (he
> > almost died).
>
> It wasn't _that_ serious.

Really?  I remember reading an article calling it "life threatening."

> > He's not participating in the Olympics because both of
> > his legs were nearly pulverized.
>
> Probable. But I'm not so sure. He has been happily hiking around
some months
> ago -- last what I've read of him.

That's good to hear.

> Just now Wolfgang Perner has got bronze in the 10 km biathlon
(involves
> shooting and skiing). Never heard of him. Probably I'll forget him
pretty
> soon if the media let me. :-) I just DON"T KARE... oh, sorry :->

There was a good story on one of the nightly news programs tonight on
Austrian skiiers.  I guess the government funded an academy to train
the top 150 or so skiiers in the nation.  Forty or fifty medalists
have been trained in said school.


> > I think patriotism, as an American,
> > is good, though.  If this happened to Britain I doubt I would
become
> > upset at an overemphasis on British patriotism.
>
> Oh, never mind. The Britons would. :-) German patriotism has graded
> imperceptibly into nationalism and that into national socialism.
Result --
> almost only Nazis say they're "proud to be a German".

Bingo.  There was a nice little article in Time Magazine (I read it
today) discussing the views of Europeans on "patriotism."  As you
said, many Europeans see patriotism as more akin to nationalism, which
has had horrendous results in the 20th century.  The major problem
here is that we come from two very different cultures.  Because of
what Europe has experienced, patriotism seems bad or evil.  But, in
America we are taught to be "proud to be an American" from a young
age.

>(Personally I
think it
> is only possible to be proud of one's own achievements, to which
being born
> as the citizen of a state can never belong.) While German patriotism
was
> being invented, Goethe wrote "patriotism spoils history".

Generally, I agree with you.  But, I think it is also possible to be
proud of others' achievements, whether they be your friends or your
entire country.  There is a special bond felt by Americans.  Perhaps
this is because we have a followed a different path to statehood than
many other nations (especially many European countries).

> > BTW, my
> > flag's still flying on the side of my house.
>
> What for, actually? To show you're a US citizen? That's nothing
special
> where you live. To show you support the government, the president,
whomever?
> That's probably neither something special. To show you didn't like
Sept. 11?
> That's the default assumption anyway! ~:-|

Actually, basically your first suggestions summed it up.  Yes, I am
proud to live in this nation.  And, yes, I do want to show support for
both the government and the nation as a whole.  I didn't like
September 11, but that is not why the flag is up.  My flag is flying
to show my patriotism and support.  This is natural to most Americans,
but may be foreign to many Europeans (in the Time article the writer
mentioned that he rarely saw British and French citizens flying
flags...I don't really remember any Austrian flags flying when I was
in Innsbruck).

>
> > Don't think Clinton wouldn't have made similar moves
>
> Oh, I don't. Clinton was just a lesser evil than either Bush.

I don't see Bush the senior, Clinton, or Bush the junior as any type
of evil, and I don't really see any as worse than the others.  All
have different viewpoints (well, at least Clinton and the two Bushes),
that's all.  I wouldn't tend to say that one is "right" or "wrong;"
"evil" or "good." :-)

> > (I mean, he was
> > ready to begin the missile defense system until he "pulled out" to
let
> > his successor decide).
>
> Can't remember that, but I'll believe it. It is well remembered that
at the
> beginning of Monicagate Clinton suddenly gave order to bomb Iraq.
Good
> cartoon "at first I've given order to bomb Starr's office".

Well, actually he gave an order to bomb terrorist training camps in
Afghanistan.  The Iraq bombing campaign was also going on...so in
reality, he was involved in two bombings (although both were in some
way necessary).

> While I am at it -- this time someone _should_ have bombed Bagdad
while
> Haider was there!!! Now he's come home and produces laughter,
embarrassment
> and rage alike all over the country, huh, the world... Bush is just
too slow
> B-|

America may take care of that for you (without Haider, of course!).
There is word in the press that Iraq will be our next target.  It
seems as if our government wants Saddam out.  I'm not normally one to
believe that the U.S. should be able to dictate the lives of another
culture or people, but in this case Saddam has to go.  He has caused
his people enough trouble.

> > Europe is much more liberal than America,
>
> What exactly do you mean by liberal? For example, in Germany the
liberal
> party has lost much in the last few years, and Austria's has even
dropped
> out of parliament ( = below 5 %). (Even though Austria has too few
parties,
> somehow.)

By liberal I don't mean the liberal party (any party can call itself
liberal).  I mean liberal in ideals (no death penalty, increased
government programs and spending, welfare state, etc.).  In those
senses Europe is much more liberal than the U.S., as a whole.

> > but it's almost like many
> > Europeans "ignore" the misdeeds of Democrats (a la Clinton) and
> > magnify those of Republicans (Bush).
>
> You can blame everything you want on the mass media which are the
sole
> source of information about the USA. =8-) Whitewater was covered
very
> shortly, apparently there's little to say on it? Then the Democrats
are, or
> appear, much closer to the so-called European values: Clinton was
silent on
> the death penalty, Bush orders to kill them all, and to get into the
EU it's
> a prerequisite to have abolished the death penalty. Why is Öcalan
still
> alive? Because Turkey wants badly to enter the EU. The death penalty
is
> widely considered uncivilized Wild West stuff in Europe.

The death penalty is a major sticking point.  I wouldn't say that Bush
"orders to kill them all."  He just so happened to be live in and be
elected governor of a state that is very conservative and has a track
record of strongly utilizing the death penalty.  He doesn't "order"
the death penalty, the courts do (fair and impartial, at least in most
cases, juries).  I have my doubts about the death penalty, though...

> > Feel free to prove me wrong!
>
> Prove? In politics? Phew, you ask for something... :-)

Same as with science :-)

> > > But how can a kamikaze be a coward???
> >
> > Are you serious, David?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Maybe a physical coward wouldn't fly a plane
> > into a building.  Maybe these terrorists weren't physical cowards.
>
> Indeed not. Suicide demands some courage. (Erm, so much for what I
think on
> the difference between courage, especially excesses of military
bravery, and
> plain stupidity.)

> > But, these idiots were emotional cowards, spiritual cowards,
political
> > cowards.
>
> Could you explain?

These cowards (yes, I continue to use the word! :-) were cowards
because they decided to kill innocent people when they had a qualm
with our policies.  Sure, they killed themselves.  But, because they
killed themselves they didn't have to face anyone.  They didn't have
to go to jail, live through a court trial, or be ridiculed.  No, they
"believed" that they would kill people and then go to "heaven," where
seven virgins and a grove of fig trees would be waiting for them.
That's cowardly.

> > You dislike American policies so you kill 2,000 innocent
> > people?  Maybe their method was not physically cowardly, but their
> > actions definitely qualify as cowardly.
>
> I fail to see the connection here. Killing as many innocent people
as
> possible is evil, idiotic, what have you, but why cowardish? There's
no need
> to call _every_ bad guy a coward.

Certainly not.  But, as I said above, these bad guys didn't have to
face anyone (except God...) for their crime but instead fell back on
the axiom that they were going to a heaven chock full of virgins :-)

> > > > More to the point, how
> > > > could Sept. 11 be avoided?
> > >
> > > What has that to do with the Olympic Games (or the price of tea
in
> > > China, is the phrase, I think)?
> >
> > It doesn't have anything to do with the Olympics per se...but,
with
> > the international community gathering for the first time, in the
same
> > nation where 2,000 people were killed...it's tough to avoid.
>
> True. But it needn't be emphasized so long that the rest of the
world thinks
> "aw, are they obsessed with Sept. 11" -- that's not what should
become of
> that horrendous event.

No.  Absolutely not.  I feel bad that the rest of the world (or some
of it) may feel that way.  Obviously, it is a clash of cultures.

> > And, not
> > mentioning Sept. 11 would seem unpatriotic.
>
> There you have it -- as a European of my generation I don't
understand what
> you mean. Please explain.

Once again, a cultural thing.  Americans would have been in uproar if
September 11 wasn't mentioned.  I mean, a few days before the opening
ceremonies the IOC told us that we could not bring the flag from the
World Trade Center to the Olympics.  This caused a huge uproar with
the public...

> > > > The domestic
> > > > and international press should lighten up and do their friggin
> > > > jobs.
> > >
> > > Which include to report and to comment.
> >
> > To report, yes.  To barrage the public with its viewpoint, no.
>
> That viewpoint was clearly labeled as such, as a comment. And, most
> newspapers have some political direction that they can't really hide
in
> their reports; Die Presse is notorious for that.

One of our best cable news channels, Fox News, has a motto that goes
something like: "we report, you decide."  I like that.  Unfortunately,
most newspapers do have a political direction (whether it be liberal
or conservative).

Once again, comments from anyone welcome (including you spec people!).

Steve

Brian said:

>>You know whenever you say that the formicorns do not
form a monophyletic familial grouping, somewhere in the world a
formicorn DIES!!? medicine....where's my medicine....<<
CLAP CLAP CLAP
I _do_ believe in in family Formicornidae,
I _do_ believe in in family Formicornidae,
I _do_ believe in in family Formicornidae

Okay, okay, you got me.  Lightning arcs across the sky as the gods
battle, and in every battle one is victorious and one admits defeat.
It'll take a while, but I'll knock all the formicorns down to -idae
status.
I see what you meant about there not being much distinction between the
formicorns and the other afrohadrosaurs, but there is only small
conscencion I'd like to get---let's give the orths their own -inae
grouping.  They really aren't ealines.

Well, the bright side is I can fuse the afrohadrosaurs back together
with the regular hadrosaurs---I was never really comfortable with that
division---even as I made it.  One question, though: What's the proper
name for hadrosaurs?  Hadrosauria?  Hadrosauroidea?  Hadrosauroididae?
(I think I made that last one up, but you get my point)

And now for something completely different:
Drhoz sent me some new banners, including a sillouette heading for a
clade page (yes, I am going to make clade pages---mostly out of bits and
pieces cut from other sections) and a great picture for the Closer Look
sections
     More on that last bit:  I propose we do (at least) one Closer Look
section for each continent.  These sections would come between the
continent description and the sample taxa, and would cover interesting
ecosystems within the continent.  For South America, the rectal probe
bit is the obvious choice.  For North America, I'm planning to do a
thing on the relationships between different animals on the grassland
(niche partitioning amoung grazers, etc.) What about the other
continents?  Closer Look sections should talk about a series of species
that have interesting relationships with each other (vis the rectal
probe...)

Hey Daid Namen:
I'll get your two new pictures uploaded this weekend, don't worry.
>>Go check out the photo section.<<
Hu?

HP David M said:
[some stuff about phylocoders that I forgot to comment on last message]
Yeah, I know that phylogenic ranking is completely arbitrary.  It sounds
better though, to say "the family Formicornidae" than "that one group of
dinosaurs".
Besides, the cladogram we've been using to keep track of our critters is
based upon that of HP T. Mike Keesey.  That is to say, it needs a name
for every grouping.  I'm planning on switching to another format---one
using sister groups---in the book, but for now, we need names for every
node.
Bear in mind that I've only just been learning the specifics of
cladistics very recently.  I've got a great book called The Variety of
Life (by Colin Tudge), and it's been really helpful, but I'm still not
completely at home with the vocabulary.

Ummm, oh yes, one last thing.
I'm going to split the birds out of just "Aves" and give each family
("-formes" grouping) its own page.  That's fair, ne?

Dan

> Well...I suppose we could fuse all the formicorns into a single family
> (-idae)---then I could put all the hadrosaurs on one page, again---but
> then we'd have a whole bunch of (-inae) sub-clades.

Huh huh huh. Forget about it. HP David Peter's website has Anurognathidae
within Dimorphodontidae, and HP Jonathan R. Wagner has published
Saurolophidae within Hadrosauridae. Ranks are dead, therefore the meanings
of their suffixes are dead, too. <blood dripping from the knife> <blip>
<blop>

> David M said:
> >>OIC. Thanx. I'll have a look at the website soon. Just don't know
> when,
> university keeps me busy (holidays -- hah).<<
> Don't look at the website!  Run!  Run far and fast.

Run? Me? Now that I've just (finally) managed to get a driver's license?
Hah! Never... =8-) I seek the danger. I will look at the website.

Anyone tired of this discussion? Please tell, and I'll move offlist.

> I'd rather spend taxpayer money on defense than on funding unnecessary
> programs and studies :-)  At least defense has an immediate and
> visible purpose...which I see as a method by which to deter instead of
> to fight per se.

Fine, fine. Just some parts of defense are "unnecessary programs and
studies".

> > Just in case, does everyone remember the Scientific American article
> > "Why National Missile Defense WON'T WORK" (capital letters in the
> > original, but in red)? :-)
>
> Nope, haven't seen it.

George N. Lewis, Theodore A. Postol* & John Pike, Scientific American August
1999

* A. Postol? Pseudonym??? :-)

"The current plan for defending the U.S.[ ]against a ballistic-missile
attack faces many of the problems that plagued a similar plan three decades
ago"

> I'm undecided on missile defense.  If the
> science is sound, then good.  If it can protect the U.S. against rogue
> missiles, then good.

There is no science in it, and it can't protect anything. It's ridiculously
easy to overwhelm, to trick, ... even assuming every counter-attack missile
would hit (LOL). And of course assuming that a threat by missiles is real.
The threat of the future, no, present is the lone terrorist with a suitcase
bomb (a nuke, I mean), a test tube with a few billion *Bacillus anthracis*,
a plastic bag with sarine, or a hijacked plane. The ability to kill lots of
people is no longer the monopoly of states, rogue or otherwise.

> The one good thing about missile defense is that
> the Russians aren't really against it.  Sure, they sent out a
> declaration denouncing the U.S., but that was basically for show.

Actually, I think Putin is laughing to this day. "If they really want to
pump billions and billions of tax $ into such a theater, then it's no use
trying to stop them."

> Anything
> that can help protect anyone from violence and harm is good,

Of course. Just NMD can't. From said paper:

>>
Potential Missile Defense Countermeasures

Overwhelm the defense
- Build more missiles than the defense can intercept
- Put multiple nuclear warheads on each missile
- Deploy chemical or biological agents in many small submunitions

Hinder warhead identification
- Deploy replica or traffic decoys
- Hide warhead in one of many metal-coated balloons
- Surround warhead with thousands of tiny radar-reflecting wires called
chaff
- Disguise warhead among debris from exploded booster rockets

Hinder warhead detection
- Jam radars
- Lead attack with nuclear explosions to blind infrared detectors
- Encase warhead in cooled shroud so it is invisible to infrared detectors
- Shape the warhead or the shroud so it reflects less radar energy
- Cover warhead with radar absorbing materials
- Attack missile-tracking satellites and coastal radars

Prevent the interceptor from hitting the warhead
- Hide warhead behind screens or large balloons
- Launch low-flying cruise missiles and shorter-range ballistic missiles
from ships
- Add thrusters to warhead to enable maneuvers
<<

Everything much more detailed in the text.

> > > Nobody seems to be able to beat the Austrians.  Speaking of that,
> > > how's Herman[n] Maier doing?
> >
> > Don't know. I'm hardly interested in sports. He hasn't been
> > mentioned recently anywhere I've looked.

Oh, I mentioned "football". I didn't mean American Football but soccer, of
course (which, as everybody fouls, is de facto just as brutal...).

> Well, he was injured a few months ago in a horrific car crash (he
> almost died).

It wasn't _that_ serious.

> He's not participating in the Olympics because both of
> his legs were nearly pulverized.

Probable. But I'm not so sure. He has been happily hiking around some months
ago -- last what I've read of him.

Just now Wolfgang Perner has got bronze in the 10 km biathlon (involves
shooting and skiing). Never heard of him. Probably I'll forget him pretty
soon if the media let me. :-) I just DON"T KARE... oh, sorry :->

> > > The Texan didn't
> > > simply declare the games opened. He had to do that while
> > > explicitly
> > > mentioning that he did this in lieu of a proud, determined and
> > > thankful nation.
>
> Which looks awkward to Europeans because that kind and amount of
> patriotism has come out of fashion pretty soon after WWII.

To other Europeans, it looks simply superfluous. Why again and again mention
his determined nation?

> I think patriotism, as an American,
> is good, though.  If this happened to Britain I doubt I would become
> upset at an overemphasis on British patriotism.

Oh, never mind. The Britons would. :-) German patriotism has graded
imperceptibly into nationalism and that into national socialism. Result --
almost only Nazis say they're "proud to be a German". (Personally I think it
is only possible to be proud of one's own achievements, to which being born
as the citizen of a state can never belong.) While German patriotism was
being invented, Goethe wrote "patriotism spoils history".
         Austria is a special case here. Only in the last few decades has the
idea come into consideration that there is such a thing as an Austrian
nation in the first place. Meanwhile it's a very broad consensus that there
is an Austrian nation -- and that nations are artificial constructs defined
via state citizenship and no ethnic features whatsoever (except maybe,
again, soccer). I have an Austrian passport, so I'm an Austrian, so what.
:-|

> BTW, my
> flag's still flying on the side of my house.

What for, actually? To show you're a US citizen? That's nothing special
where you live. To show you support the government, the president, whomever?
That's probably neither something special. To show you didn't like Sept. 11?
That's the default assumption anyway! ~:-|

> Seriously, I think that is looking at the symbolism too deeply.

Maybe. Austrian conservatives are easy to insult. :-)

> In America we REVERE that team.

No wonder. :-)

> They were very popular public figures
> long before the terrorism attacks.

No wonder.

> They were frequently the subject
> of magazine articles and books, and the game was replayed on cable
> thousands of times before September 11.

No wonder.

> [...] why can't America?

It's (apparently) prone to misunderstandings. I'd have avoided it.

> > quitting Kyoto, quitting ABM, not paying UN debts, not signing
> > treaties like
> > those against land mines or biological weapons and so on, which in
> > sum sound
> > like "we'll protect the profits of our (armaments) industry, and
> > shit over
> > the rest of the world, wherever that is".
>
> I wouldn't blame any of the above on Bush, but on the U.S. as a whole.

Oh! I tried to avoid that generalization :-)

> Don't think Clinton wouldn't have made similar moves

Oh, I don't. Clinton was just a lesser evil than either Bush.

> (I mean, he was
> ready to begin the missile defense system until he "pulled out" to let
> his successor decide).

Can't remember that, but I'll believe it. It is well remembered that at the
beginning of Monicagate Clinton suddenly gave order to bomb Iraq. Good
cartoon "at first I've given order to bomb Starr's office".

While I am at it -- this time someone _should_ have bombed Bagdad while
Haider was there!!! Now he's come home and produces laughter, embarrassment
and rage alike all over the country, huh, the world... Bush is just too slow
B-|

> And, don't think that Gore would have done
> much different (except for Kyoto), either.

I know pretty little about Gore. I don't have an opinion on what he'd done
regarding isolationism...

> I don't understand why
> many Europeans loved Clinton, pushed for Gore, and now hate Bush.

Because Bush is obviously much worse than both together. Awwww, here a
Monicagate, there a Whitewater... ;-)

> Europe is much more liberal than America,

What exactly do you mean by liberal? For example, in Germany the liberal
party has lost much in the last few years, and Austria's has even dropped
out of parliament ( = below 5 %). (Even though Austria has too few parties,
somehow.)

> but it's almost like many
> Europeans "ignore" the misdeeds of Democrats (a la Clinton) and
> magnify those of Republicans (Bush).

You can blame everything you want on the mass media which are the sole
source of information about the USA. =8-) Whitewater was covered very
shortly, apparently there's little to say on it? Then the Democrats are, or
appear, much closer to the so-called European values: Clinton was silent on
the death penalty, Bush orders to kill them all, and to get into the EU it's
a prerequisite to have abolished the death penalty. Why is Öcalan still
alive? Because Turkey wants badly to enter the EU. The death penalty is
widely considered uncivilized Wild West stuff in Europe.

> Feel free to prove me wrong!

Prove? In politics? Phew, you ask for something... :-)

> > But how can a kamikaze be a coward???
>
> Are you serious, David?

Yes.

> Maybe a physical coward wouldn't fly a plane
> into a building.  Maybe these terrorists weren't physical cowards.

Indeed not. Suicide demands some courage. (Erm, so much for what I think on
the difference between courage, especially excesses of military bravery, and
plain stupidity.)

> But, these idiots were emotional cowards, spiritual cowards, political
> cowards.

Could you explain?

> You dislike American policies so you kill 2,000 innocent
> people?  Maybe their method was not physically cowardly, but their
> actions definitely qualify as cowardly.

I fail to see the connection here. Killing as many innocent people as
possible is evil, idiotic, what have you, but why cowardish? There's no need
to call _every_ bad guy a coward.

> > > More to the point, how
> > > could Sept. 11 be avoided?
> >
> > What has that to do with the Olympic Games (or the price of tea in
> > China, is the phrase, I think)?
>
> It doesn't have anything to do with the Olympics per se...but, with
> the international community gathering for the first time, in the same
> nation where 2,000 people were killed...it's tough to avoid.

True. But it needn't be emphasized so long that the rest of the world thinks
"aw, are they obsessed with Sept. 11" -- that's not what should become of
that horrendous event.

> And, not
> mentioning Sept. 11 would seem unpatriotic.

There you have it -- as a European of my generation I don't understand what
you mean. Please explain.

> > > Whenever a nation hosts the Olympics their culture is
> > > intentionally highlighted.
> >
> > Can't escape being highlighted.
>
> And, that's a good thing.  Watching the Olympics certainly helps
> me-and others-learn about the cultures of other lands.

Certainly -- as long as the countries don't portray caricatures of
themselves or otherwise present circus shows, as has happened in some parts
of Australia's presentation 2 years ago.

> I'm sure Clinton spoke at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996.  By your logic
> that would have been advocating hate.

Of course not. Depends on what one says.

> I disagree.  Bush didn't
> mention anything specifically about terrorists or the war.  But, you
> see his speech as a symbolic symbol of America's
> invincibility/violence, etc.  I bet you would have said the same about
> Clinton if a war were going on at the time.

Probably.

>  The point is this: when
> the games are on American soil our President should be able to talk.
> Just because a war is going on doesn't make his talk any different or
> more/less symbolic.  I'm sure Austria's leader spoke at the two
> Innsbruck games.

I really doubt any Austrian politician said more, except for a few polite
phrases, than "I declare the games opened". Why anything more?

> > > The domestic
> > > and international press should lighten up and do their friggin
> > > jobs.
> >
> > Which include to report and to comment.
>
> To report, yes.  To barrage the public with its viewpoint, no.

That viewpoint was clearly labeled as such, as a comment. And, most
newspapers have some political direction that they can't really hide in
their reports; Die Presse is notorious for that.

Hey folks. I see you've all been busy. Go check out the photo section.

darn it! i can post from the webpage but not thru  email!

Hey ho!

Perhaps I should explain my train-of-thought with regards to being
lumpy with the ungulapedes:

Somehow...the current splitting of the ungulapedes into 6 or more
families seems a bit excessive. The problem I have is this: The
ungulapedes are a recently evolved group, appearing in the Oligocene
and not diversifying until the Late Miocene (when I originally created
the afrohadrosaurs I set this date in order to give the impression of a
hot new, diversifying clade full of evolutionary vigour - kinda like
murid rodents today).

Now an explosive diversification event of a megafaunal clade into THAT
many families in such an incredibly short space of time WITHOUT a
preceding extinction event seems to me completely unprecedented.
Remember, the ungulapedes did not march into an bare ecosystem and
suddenly branch out; there was an ecological war with the local
ornithischians. Put it another way:  When the early Bovidae invaded
Africa in the earliest Pliocene and branched off into the myriad of
antelope species did they become so anatomically different from their
ancestors that we today class them as a separate family? Nope, they
still possess the suite of characters that makes us class them as
bovids.

Dan wrote: then we'd have a whole bunch of (-inae) sub-clades

This crap happens all the time during radiation events. The Bovidae is
split into over a dozen subfamilies (alcelaphines, antelopines,
boselaphines, bovines, caprines, cephalophines, hippotragines,
neotragrines, ovibovines, reduncines, rupicaprines, saigines,
strepsicerotines) so I was thinking that splitting the formicorns (okay
Dan, you got me back for Rhinolophus!) into 3 or 4 subfamilies wasn't
too excessive. Makes it seem more authentic.

Okay, I was actually worried that I would not be able to justify
keeping the afrohadrosaurs in a separate family from Matti's ex-
boreosaurs. They look very much alike and it was established that they
are closely related. Therefore I went to great lengths to concoct a
series of imaginary anatomical features that would justify separating
the two based on stylistic differences in Matti's and my artwork -
subnarial depression - Matti seems place a more strongly defined
demarcation around the naris, expanded middle toe, expansion of the
nasals and frontals. Separating the ultracornids was more difficult but
in stating that they fall phylogenetically in between the two major
families I hoped to infer that the hornmeister had it's own unique
suite of characters.

That is why I feel apprehensive about the current Eurasian ungulapede
scheme - splitting into 4 families (including the elumbe) seems
excessive without a) comment on the incredible diversification in such
a short space of time b) a consistent suite (besides size-related
features and habits) of anatomical features separating the species into
different families. I mean, how is a kirin any more different from a
bruton or yale than say, a dik-dik is from an eland, wilderbeest, ibex,
merino ram, aurochs or american bison (all bovids)?

The lumpers of this world have found their voices and will make
themselves heard! You know whenever you say that the formicorns do not
form a monophyletic familial grouping, somewhere in the world a
formicorn DIES!!? medicine....where's my medicine....

Ozgod out!

Hey all (wow, it's weird saying that in an email, and not that Pendragon
things)

I see at least three of the Eight-And-Then-Some are present, so here we
go:
I'm still chugging away on my new species.  Brian sent me a rewrite of
Twitiaviformes (Au) and it's love-ly!  If everything goes right, you all
should be able to look at 'em by the time you read this.  I have no
bones to pick with any part of THAT revision, except that we'll need to
do some more species and fiddle with some exsisting descriptions to back
it up.

Drhoz: I am now finally at the point where I'm using the formatting
stuff you've sent me and I have some requests:
1) Banners with smaller continent/name  that go across the top of pages
within the continent chapters (like the banner of that sample page you
sent)
2) Banners like #1, but with the words "SAMPLE TAXA" added
3) Banners like #1, but with "A CLOSER LOOK" or something like that
added---these would be for digressions, like Brian's Amazon thang.

Okay, now to new buisness:

Brian (ozraptor 4---there are two other guys somewhere calling
themselves "ozraptor"?  Now there's a thought to keep one up a-night)
said:
>>too diverse!? Well I'd like to see you say that face-to-face to the:
[waffling waffling waffling]<<
Well...I suppose we could fuse all the formicorns into a single family
(-idae)---then I could put all the hadrosaurs on one page, again---but
then we'd have a whole bunch of (-inae) sub-clades.  It would also meen
a lot of work for me.  If you really want the formicorns to be all in
one family, then I'll go back and change all of the names (like ealids
becomes ealines---DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TIMES WE SAY STUFF LIKE THAT??).

Drhoz said:
>>...doesn't mean i enjoy wading thru
ankle-deep water inmy living room<<
Ah, yet another reason to live in California.  Our roof leaks when it
rains, but (here's the secret) it never rains!

>>rightio - got most of the clade banners done - had to use a bunch of
Matti's and Ozgod's pics as well as Dan-god's and mine  tho - hope you
don't mind *looks hunted and paranoid*<<
I'm fine with that.

>>tried to draw the eagle scene - not working out...<<
Well, post your sketches and I'm sure one of us will do something.
Unless you want to be the soul god of Papua.

>>want i should post a banner design or two here?<<
I say sure.

David M said:
>>OIC. Thanx. I'll have a look at the website soon. Just don't know
when,
university keeps me busy (holidays -- hah).<<
Don't look at the website!  Run!  Run far and fast.  It's too late for
me, but your soul is still your own.  (get's mauled by a penguin) AGH!

End Transmission
Dan

--- In DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads@y..., "David Marjanovic"
<david.marjanovic@g...> wrote:
> And you think raising defense spending to infinity is not spending
billions
> on a glut of unnecessary programs, like NMD, and won't cause raised
taxes or
> a nice little deficit? :-}

I'd rather spend taxpayer money on defense than on funding unnecessary
programs and studies :-)  At least defense has an immediate and
visible purpose...which I see as a method by which to deter instead of
to fight per se.

Sure, the USA aren't Austria which should
easily
> be able to get along without any armed forces at all (and
nevertheless will
> soon buy fighter planes for horrendous sums...), but still.
>         Just in case, does everyone remember the Scientific American
article
> "Why National Missile Defense WON'T WORK" (capital letters in the
original,
> but in red)? :-)

Nope, haven't seen it.  I'm undecided on missile defense.  If the
science is sound, then good.  If it can protect the U.S. against rogue
missiles, then good.  The one good thing about missile defense is that
the Russians aren't really against it.  Sure, they sent out a
declaration denouncing the U.S., but that was basically for show.
Now, if the Russians were truly against the system and were willing to
break off peaceful negotiations, then that would be bad.  Anything
that can help protect anyone from violence and harm is good, granted
that the diplomatic ramifications aren't too costly (and, in this
case, the price can be kept reasonably low! :-)

> > Nobody seems to be able to beat the Austrians.  Speaking of that,
> > how's Herman Maier doing?
>
> Don't know. I'm hardly interested in sports. He hasn't been
mentioned
> recently anywhere I've looked.

Well, he was injured a few months ago in a horrific car crash (he
almost died).  He's not participating in the Olympics because both of
his legs were nearly pulverized.  Other Austrian skiiers are picking
up his slack, though.  But, so far the U.S. leads in the medal count
(we'll see how long that lasts :-)

>
> > > The Texan didn't
> > > simply declare the games opened. He had to do that while
explicitly
> > > mentioning that he did this in lieu of a proud, determined and
> > > thankful nation.
>
> Which looks awkward to Europeans because that kind and amount of
patriotism
> has come out of fashion pretty soon after WWII.

It's hard for me to put myself in the shoes of a European, so I won't
try.  I'll let David do that! :-)  I think patriotism, as an American,
is good, though.  If this happened to Britain I doubt I would become
upset at an overemphasis on British patriotism.  But, perhaps that is
strictly because I have "American" views due to my homeland.  BTW, my
flag's still flying on the side of my house.  The same cannot be said
of many other Americans :-(

>
> > > another first -- a whole team lit the Olympic Flame. Again not
some
> > > team. But of all that ice-hockey team that in 1980, at the times
of
> > > bitter Cold War, prevailed over the USSR.
> >
> > Yep, the greatest upset in the history of modern sport.  Too bad I
> > wasn't alive to see it.
>
> Neither was I... must have been like the Austrian football victory
over
> Germany in Córdoba which is treated like a revenge for a battle in
1866...
> don't know when that was, I haven't seen it either. Well, it somehow
looked
> like "we'll defeat you all, and the terrorists, like we defeated
Evil Empire
> in 1980".

Seriously, I think that is looking at the symbolism too deeply.  In
America we REVERE that team.  They were very popular public figures
long before the terrorism attacks.  They were frequently the subject
of magazine articles and books, and the game was replayed on cable
thousands of times before September 11.  I have no doubt that they
would have lit the flame anyway.  I mean, they are our (America's)
greatest winter Olympic heroes ever (perhaps greatest Olympic heroes
ever).  They beat the dreaded "commies" the last time the winter games
were held on American soil.  If Japan and Australia can allow their
greatest Olympic heroes to light the cauldron, why can't America?

>
> > Really, arrogance?
>
> See above. (I mean, personally I rather smile, I don't have such a
feeling
> of honor that's so easy to harm like those conservatives.)
Additionally,
> everyone's already biased by facts like Bush and former US
governments
> quitting Kyoto, quitting ABM, not paying UN debts, not signing
treaties like
> those against land mines or biological weapons and so on, which in
sum sound
> like "we'll protect the profits of our (armaments) industry, and
shit over
> the rest of the world, wherever that is".

I wouldn't blame any of the above on Bush, but on the U.S. as a whole.
Don't think Clinton wouldn't have made similar moves (I mean, he was
ready to begin the missile defense system until he "pulled out" to let
his successor decide).  And, don't think that Gore would have done
much different (except for Kyoto), either.  I don't understand why
many Europeans loved Clinton, pushed for Gore, and now hate Bush.
Europe is much more liberal than America, but it's almost like many
Europeans "ignore" the misdeeds of Democrats (a la Clinton) and
magnify those of Republicans (Bush).  Of course, this is just based on
what I've read of Europe and what I've seen in the few weeks I've been
on the continent.  Feel free to prove me wrong!

>
> > Less than five
> > months after a cowardly attack [...]
>
> Come on. Throw adjectives at them however you want, and I'll keep
saying
> "that's still too little for them". But how can a kamikaze be a
coward???

Are you serious, David?  Maybe a physical coward wouldn't fly a plane
into a building.  Maybe these terrorists weren't physical cowards.
But, these idiots were emotional cowards, spiritual cowards, political
cowards.  You dislike American policies so you kill 2,000 innocent
people?  Maybe their method was not physically cowardly, but their
actions definitely qualify as cowardly.

>
> > the Olympic games are being held a mere few thousand miles from
the
> > attack site.
>
> "A mere few thousand miles"... and you think you've visited Europe!
:-D

A mere few thousand miles is good for the U.S. (my family has
frequently covered 2,000 miles or so on vacations! :-)

>
> > This is the first major world gathering since September
> > 11, and was a perfect time to celebrate a unified world...a world
> > unified against injustice and terrorism.
>

> > More to the point, how
> > could Sept. 11 be avoided?
>
> What has that to do with the Olympic Games (or the price of tea in
China, is
> the phrase, I think)?

It doesn't have anything to do with the Olympics per se...but, with
the international community gathering for the first time, in the same
nation where 2,000 people were killed...it's tough to avoid.  And, not
mentioning Sept. 11 would seem unpatriotic.

>
> > Whenever a nation hosts the Olympics their culture is
intentionally
> > highlighted.
>
> Can't escape being highlighted.

And, that's a good thing.  Watching the Olympics certainly helps
me-and others-learn about the cultures of other lands.

>
> > Four years ago in Nagano a Japanese figure skater,
> > wearing traditional garb, lit the cauldron.  In Sydney in 2000
> > hundreds of children danced traditional dances as an native
Australian
> > lit the cauldron.  So, what makes the 1980 hockey team any
different?
> > What makes Bush's declaration any different?
>
> They introduce all that fight and hate. Are there no USA if they
don't fight
> terror? Do they need it for themselves? Hardly of course, but it
looks
> like...

I already explained the hockey team above.  As I said, these guys were
national heroes long before Sept. 11.  And, Bush is our president.
I'm sure Clinton spoke at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996.  By your logic
that would have been advocating hate.  I disagree.  Bush didn't
mention anything specifically about terrorists or the war.  But, you
see his speech as a symbolic symbol of America's
invincibility/violence, etc.  I bet you would have said the same about
Clinton if a war were going on at the time.  The point is this: when
the games are on American soil our President should be able to talk.
Just because a war is going on doesn't make his talk any different or
more/less symbolic.  I'm sure Austria's leader spoke at the two
Innsbruck games.

>
> > The domestic
> > and international press should lighten up and do their friggin
jobs.
>
> Which include to report and to comment.

To report, yes.  To barrage the public with its viewpoint, no.  The
press has a job to report stories and events without bias...in other
words, fairly.  Editorial writers, columnists, etc. certainly have the
freedom to share their opinion.  But, the overall goal of the press
should be to do what you say: report.  The media should not
indoctrinate.

Whew!  I enjoy these political debates.  Anyone is free to jump in.

Steve

> " the formicorns ("boreosaurs") are too diverse to make them all a
> single family."
>
> too diverse!? Well I'd like to see you say that face-to-face to the

PHYLOCODERS!!! Wooah hah hah haaaah... everything and nothing is too diverse
to make it a family or any other rank! :-P

> or how about...

There's a so-called family of plant-sucking beetles with 17,000 species.

********************************************
WORLD CLADISM NOW
-- HP Chris Brochu's signature in winter 1994/5

> >>What is Spec?<<
> Ah ha ha!  Foolish mortal.  Tremble in fear as I, Dan, god of (among
> other things) North America,

|-O

> bring great changes upon thy head.
> Remember a thread we had on the DML about six months ago about
> SPECulative dinosaur species?

OIC. Thanx. I'll have a look at the website soon. Just don't know when,
university keeps me busy (holidays -- hah).

> > The USA are a MORONARCHY. http://www.presidentmoron.com/
>
> Ooohhh...that website is not to my liking :-)  Seriously, though,
> what's wrong with defense spending?  It's certainly better than
> spending billions on a glut of unnecessary programs and then raising
> taxes.

And you think raising defense spending to infinity is not spending billions
on a glut of unnecessary programs, like NMD, and won't cause raised taxes or
a nice little deficit? :-} Sure, the USA aren't Austria which should easily
be able to get along without any armed forces at all (and nevertheless will
soon buy fighter planes for horrendous sums...), but still.
         Just in case, does everyone remember the Scientific American article
"Why National Missile Defense WON'T WORK" (capital letters in the original,
but in red)? :-)

> Nobody seems to be able to beat the Austrians.  Speaking of that,
> how's Herman Maier doing?

Don't know. I'm hardly interested in sports. He hasn't been mentioned
recently anywhere I've looked.

> > The Texan didn't
> > simply declare the games opened. He had to do that while explicitly
> > mentioning that he did this in lieu of a proud, determined and
> > thankful nation.

Which looks awkward to Europeans because that kind and amount of patriotism
has come out of fashion pretty soon after WWII.

> > another first -- a whole team lit the Olympic Flame. Again not some
> > team. But of all that ice-hockey team that in 1980, at the times of
> > bitter Cold War, prevailed over the USSR.
>
> Yep, the greatest upset in the history of modern sport.  Too bad I
> wasn't alive to see it.

Neither was I... must have been like the Austrian football victory over
Germany in Córdoba which is treated like a revenge for a battle in 1866...
don't know when that was, I haven't seen it either. Well, it somehow looked
like "we'll defeat you all, and the terrorists, like we defeated Evil Empire
in 1980".

> Really, arrogance?

See above. (I mean, personally I rather smile, I don't have such a feeling
of honor that's so easy to harm like those conservatives.) Additionally,
everyone's already biased by facts like Bush and former US governments
quitting Kyoto, quitting ABM, not paying UN debts, not signing treaties like
those against land mines or biological weapons and so on, which in sum sound
like "we'll protect the profits of our (armaments) industry, and shit over
the rest of the world, wherever that is".

> Less than five
> months after a cowardly attack [...]

Come on. Throw adjectives at them however you want, and I'll keep saying
"that's still too little for them". But how can a kamikaze be a coward???

> the Olympic games are being held a mere few thousand miles from the
> attack site.

"A mere few thousand miles"... and you think you've visited Europe! :-D

> This is the first major world gathering since September
> 11, and was a perfect time to celebrate a unified world...a world
> unified against injustice and terrorism.

The purpose of the Olympic Games AFAIK is to have a world unified in sports,
celebrating sports, and forgetting about most other things.

> Not only Americans were killed in NYC and Washington.  British,
> Japanese, French, Saudi, Israeli etc. citizens were also murdered.
> People from all of these lands gathered in Salt Lake City.

Coincidence. I mean, that was clear before Sept. 11.

> Why not
> dedicate the opening ceremonies to Sept. 11?

Why do it?

> More to the point, how
> could Sept. 11 be avoided?

What has that to do with the Olympic Games (or the price of tea in China, is
the phrase, I think)?
(Just to add a little stab -- NMD couldn't have done it, and CIA, NSA etc.
didn't.)

> Whenever a nation hosts the Olympics their culture is intentionally
> highlighted.

Can't escape being highlighted.

> Four years ago in Nagano a Japanese figure skater,
> wearing traditional garb, lit the cauldron.  In Sydney in 2000
> hundreds of children danced traditional dances as an native Australian
> lit the cauldron.  So, what makes the 1980 hockey team any different?
> What makes Bush's declaration any different?

They introduce all that fight and hate. Are there no USA if they don't fight
terror? Do they need it for themselves? Hardly of course, but it looks
like...

> The domestic
> and international press should lighten up and do their friggin jobs.

Which include to report and to comment.

Drhoz, god of the wet and spineless,  here, finally managed to sign up

*grumbles at various hardware and local environment problems... i
might be a marine biolgist but it doesn't mean i enjoy wading thru
ankle-deep water inmy living room*

rightio - got most of the clade banners done - had to use a bunch of
Matti's and Ozgod's pics as well as Dan-god's and mine  tho - hope you
don't mind *looks hunted and paranoid*

tried to draw the eagle scene - not working out...

want i should post a banner design or two here?

In his final Pendragon post Dan wrote:

" the formicorns ("boreosaurs") are too diverse to make them all a
single family."

too diverse!? Well I'd like to see you say that face-to-face to the:

Giraffidae: towering Giraffus, cryptic gracile okapi, hulking moose-
like Sivatherium.

Agamidae: flamoyant Chlamydosaurus (frill-neck), airborne Draco (flying
dragon), teeny Tympanocryptis (earless dragon), giant finbacked
Hydrosaurus (water dragon), spike-bearing, false-headed Moloch (Thorny
devil).

Scincidae: Hulking rough-scaled Tiliqua rugosus (Bobtail), Spiny
Gnypetoscincus, legless, snakelike Anomalopus. Hell in just ONE scincid
genus (Lerista) you have limbs ranging from well-developed pentadactyl
conditions, through various degrees of reduction in digits
(tetra,tri,di and monodactyl), to a minute style or even a total
absence in the case of forelimbs.

Labridae (wrasses): Megahuge toothy, humpheaded Cheilinus, colourful
lyretailed Thalassoma, bird-snouted Gomphosus, telescoping-slingjaw
Epibulus, teeny cleaning Labroides, tube-lipped polyp-feeding
Labropsis.

or how about...

Ozgod out!

>>What is Spec?<<
Ah ha ha!  Foolish mortal.  Tremble in fear as I, Dan, god of (among
other things) North America, bring great changes upon thy head.
Remember a thread we had on the DML about six months ago about
SPECulative dinosaur species?
Well...we've been buisy.

Dan

Arr
Welcome aboard, matey.  I see yee've got yeer albatross.

Dan

--- In DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads@y..., "David Marjanovic"
<david.marjanovic@g...> wrote:
> > It seems that North America is a more viable kingdom than this,
>
> Nonononono. North America is not a kingdom. To be exact, it's not a
monarchy
> at all. The USA are a MORONARCHY. http://www.presidentmoron.com/
Just like
> Côte d'Ivoire is a democrature and Austria a bureaucrature.

Ooohhh...that website is not to my liking :-)  Seriously, though,
what's wrong with defense spending?  It's certainly better than
spending billions on a glut of unnecessary programs and then raising
taxes.

> Any comments to the following that was at the bottom of the title
page of
> today's newspaper www.diepresse.com (a conservative, rather
right-wing
> newspaper)?
>
> >>George W. Bush -- a little chauvinist
>
> by Dietmar Neuwirth
>
> George W. Bush has written Olympia history. [...] [joke: he hasn't
tried to
> ski against Austrians...]

Nobody seems to be able to beat the Austrians.  Speaking of that,
how's Herman Maier doing?

It was given to Bush jun. to blow up the
borders
> of that what has been in the 106-year constantly changing history of
the
> Olympic Games of the recent age in other ways [phew, poetic
sentence, hard
> to translate]. In the official opening he took the liberty to depart
from
> tradition which is even carved into a "Charta" of its own. The Texan
didn't
> simply declare the games opened. He had to do that while explicitly
> mentioning that he did this in lieu of a proud, determined and
thankful
> nation.

I watched it.  Bush declaring the games open while standing with the
American athletes was a nice touch.

>     Critique of this [...] followed promptly by international sports
> functionaries. Those little nitpickers! After all the Olympic Games
don't
> take place somewhere, but in the only remaining leading power of
this world.
> And George W. Bush isn't some state leader who has to cling to
finely
> crafted protocol.
>     It fitted well into the picture of the opening celebration that
(how
> many times now?) the dead of September 11th were remembered and that
--
> another first -- a whole team lit the Olympic Flame. Again not some
team.
> But of all that ice-hockey team that in 1980, at the times of bitter
Cold
> War, prevailed over the USSR.

Yep, the greatest upset in the history of modern sport.  Too bad I
wasn't alive to see it.

>     All in all the opening showed several things. Firstly, that the
wounds
> that September 11th has caused run deeper than is imagined in
Europe. At the
> same time, to what little extent this tragedy has been digested [is
there a
> hole in my dictionary?] nationally. What else could a leading power
set as
> signs that clearly cross the border to arrogance. Salt Lake City has
shown a
> chauvinistic Bush and a tasteless opening direction. True grandeur
looks
> different.<<

Really, arrogance?  Our liberal press is parroting the same opinion.
It's a bunch of crap (in my...humble...opinion :-).  Less than five
months after a cowardly attack on two of our greatest national symbols
the Olympic games are being held a mere few thousand miles from the
attack site.  This is the first major world gathering since September
11, and was a perfect time to celebrate a unified world...a world
unified against injustice and terrorism.

Not only Americans were killed in NYC and Washington.  British,
Japanese, French, Saudi, Israeli etc. citizens were also murdered.
People from all of these lands gathered in Salt Lake City.  Why not
dedicate the opening ceremonies to Sept. 11?  More to the point, how
could Sept. 11 be avoided?

Whenever a nation hosts the Olympics their culture is intentionally
highlighted.  Four years ago in Nagano a Japanese figure skater,
wearing traditional garb, lit the cauldron.  In Sydney in 2000
hundreds of children danced traditional dances as an native Australian
lit the cauldron.  So, what makes the 1980 hockey team any different?
What makes Bush's declaration any different?

The opening ceremonies I watched included visions of athletes from
around the world.  The announcer even introduced every nation in
French first, then English.  Yeah, the ceremonies were overly
American.  But, hey, we're the host nation, and five months ago we
endured a tragedy the likes of which we have never seen.  The domestic
and international press should lighten up and do their friggin jobs.

Hey, come to think of it, this is kind of cool discussing politics and
such on a _dinosaur_ list (and I can't be censored!).

The above is open to any discussion!

Steve

> It seems that North America is a more viable kingdom than this,

Nonononono. North America is not a kingdom. To be exact, it's not a monarchy
at all. The USA are a MORONARCHY. http://www.presidentmoron.com/ Just like
Côte d'Ivoire is a democrature and Austria a bureaucrature.

> I look forward to seeing Spec dialogues.

What is Spec?

> >DUM DUM DUM!
> >Here I am, Dan, supreme Editor of Spec, god of North America,

Nonononono. God of Palestine. A Phoenician god imported to Crete where he
was called Great Dan -- Pasi Dan -- in Minoan Greek. That became Poseidon in
Mycenaean and then Classical Greek. :-P

Any comments to the following that was at the bottom of the title page of
today's newspaper www.diepresse.com (a conservative, rather right-wing
newspaper)?

>>George W. Bush -- a little chauvinist

by Dietmar Neuwirth

George W. Bush has written Olympia history. [...] [joke: he hasn't tried to
ski against Austrians...] It was given to Bush jun. to blow up the borders
of that what has been in the 106-year constantly changing history of the
Olympic Games of the recent age in other ways [phew, poetic sentence, hard
to translate]. In the official opening he took the liberty to depart from
tradition which is even carved into a "Charta" of its own. The Texan didn't
simply declare the games opened. He had to do that while explicitly
mentioning that he did this in lieu of a proud, determined and thankful
nation.
     Critique of this [...] followed promptly by international sports
functionaries. Those little nitpickers! After all the Olympic Games don't
take place somewhere, but in the only remaining leading power of this world.
And George W. Bush isn't some state leader who has to cling to finely
crafted protocol.
     It fitted well into the picture of the opening celebration that (how
many times now?) the dead of September 11th were remembered and that --
another first -- a whole team lit the Olympic Flame. Again not some team.
But of all that ice-hockey team that in 1980, at the times of bitter Cold
War, prevailed over the USSR.
     All in all the opening showed several things. Firstly, that the wounds
that September 11th has caused run deeper than is imagined in Europe. At the
same time, to what little extent this tragedy has been digested [is there a
hole in my dictionary?] nationally. What else could a leading power set as
signs that clearly cross the border to arrogance. Salt Lake City has shown a
chauvinistic Bush and a tasteless opening direction. True grandeur looks
different.<<

This site loads much more quickly,and you all can't be directly
annoyed by my posts about gigantic peliganish creatures.

>>I look forward to
seeing Spec dialogues.<<
Well, so far it seems no one wants to make the move, but the option's
there.

Dan

Hey ho!

Dark God of Spec Gondwana signing in!

Brian

Oh sovreign Dan,

I think this list includes three people.  It seems that North America is a
more viable kingdom than this, but welcome either way.  I look forward to
seeing Spec dialogues.

Talk to you later,

Demetrios


>From: "dbensengod" <dbensen@...>
>Reply-To: DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads@yahoogroups.com
>To: DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [DinosaurMailingList-KilledThreads] Spec
>Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 00:16:48 -0000
>
>DUM DUM DUM!
>Here I am, Dan, supreme Editor of Spec, god of North America, and
>archancelor of Unseen University.  Pendragon giving you trouble?  This
>forum may be the new home for Spec.
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

DUM DUM DUM!
Here I am, Dan, supreme Editor of Spec, god of North America, and
archancelor of Unseen University.  Pendragon giving you trouble?  This
forum may be the new home for Spec.

Where are the archives? :-)

Dear all:

I can see that this killed threads list is rather thread bare...so to
speak...but I joined in order to share this little issue of mine.

First off:  I, too, send my condolences to the many who died, and to those
who are mourning for them.

Second:  HP Lurio made a valid post on the DML today about the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  I have very little complaint with the post,
except that it does something that happens all too often in journalism
today.  This is the equalization of Israel and Zionism with Judaism, and
vice versa.  Specifically, this line is what I am referring to:

"The West Bank and Gaza were in ARAB hands, not Jewish until 1967..."

Replace "Jewish" with "Israeli" and I wouldn't be writing this.  Israel,
while being a Jewish State, is neither discriminatory against non-Jews, nor
supported by all Jews.  Zionism wasn't a religious idea until after the
Holocaust, and still remains a political, not religious, ideology.  Events
like that abomination of an assembly in Durban, South Africa, are partly the
result of mass media making this grievous error.

I just needed to share these thoughts, because I felt that the discussion on
the DML could get out-of-hand, and I wanted to dispell some possibly
regretful comments by anyone later on.  But, by the look of things, no one
will be reading this.  Oh well.  It needed to be said, I think.

-Demetrios Vital

P.S.  Again, I am not trying to insult HP Lurio in any way, and I am not
trying to accuse him of ignorance; just as I said above, his post was valid,
and I agree with all he said except the above quote.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Thank you Caleb, both for your sentiments and for honoring our wishes
by submitting your message here rather than on the dinosaur list.

--
Mickey Rowe     (rowe@...)

Guess I'll be first to post here...


    My condolences and prayers go out to all those involved and even
remotely affected by this tradgedy, as do those of the rest of the
Christian population here at the University of New Mexico. In the
words of former President Franklin Roosevelt, with a little editing,
"September 11, 2001. A day, that will live, in infamy."




                                         Sincerely,
                                         Caleb Lewis - the lurker


_______________
Jeremiah 29:11