soc.culture.usa
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa
soc.culture.usa@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* 500,000 immigration advocates march in Los Angelos - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/a7922568c71505bc
* N.Korea: Pre-emptive Attacks Can Go Both Ways - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/51baedf3751506b1
* Goh: Why no upgrading for Huougang or Potong Pasir? - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/29ee801ecd4f26cf
* Drinking Small Amounts Of Alcohol Regularly Reduces Risk Of Obesity - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c4df29f72bf30ad6
* Child sex abuse, sexual dysfunction common in US, Australia - 2 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/237a6a767cb02024
* Build a wall! - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/23de0343ff02a45e
* Where are all the great ruins of the Negro nations? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/5cfe37852f40f77c
* SO, HE WANTS TO "DEFEND ISRAEL"! - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/81766c3f68a09fd4
* LAYING BARE THE MYTH OF EVOLUTION -----> "HEY, The Emperor Has NO Clothes!" <
----- - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/caa7db9ffa45af08
* What makes a religion valid? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/692fbde3edebb694
* ZIONAZI DERSHOWITZ-PLAGIARIST AND A LIAR! - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/e0ce0cabb8470242
* UKRAINE <> USA ? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/55afac663ffe042a
* NOBODY IS AFRAID OF ISRAEL OR U.S. ANY MORE - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/219d49830c13ed03
* EINSTEIN-PHONY.LIAR,PLAGIARIST! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/252ea6d968f0cf6d
* - 1 message, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 500,000 immigration advocates march in Los Angelos
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/a7922568c71505bc
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 2:14 am
From: laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE
Looks like it's too late now to stop this. Stupid white Americans let
the mexicans invade our country and now the politicians are so scared
of losing the vote of the legal mexicans that they won't kick out the
illegals.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-03-26-immigration-rallies_x.htm
Posted 3/26/2006 11:35 AM Updated 3/26/2006 5:15 PM
Size of L.A. march surprises authorities
LOS ANGELES (AP) Thousands of immigration advocates marched through
downtown Los Angeles in one of the largest demonstrations for any
cause in recent U.S. history.
More than 500,000 protesters demanding that Congress abandon
attempts to make illegal immigration a felony and to build more walls
along the border surprised police who estimated the crowd size using
aerial photographs and other techniques, police Cmdr. Louis Gray Jr.
said.
Wearing white T-shirts to symbolize peace, the demonstrators chanted
"Mexico!" "USA!" and "Si se puede," an old Mexican-American civil
rights shout that means "Yes, we can."
In Denver, more than 50,000 people protested downtown Saturday,
according to police who had expected only a few thousand. Phoenix was
similarly surprised Friday when an estimated 20,000 people gathered
for one of the biggest demonstrations in city history, and more than
10,000 marched in Milwaukee on Thursday.
"We construct your schools. We cook your food," rapper Jorge Ruiz said
after performing at a Dallas rally that drew 1,500. "We are the motor
of this nation, but people don't see us. Blacks and whites, they had
their revolution. They had their Martin Luther King. Now it is time
for us."
Many protesters said lawmakers were unfairly targeting immigrants who
provide a major labor pool for America's economy.
(snip)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: N.Korea: Pre-emptive Attacks Can Go Both Ways
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/51baedf3751506b1
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 2:17 am
From: "Morton Davis"
"Peter Franks" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:RBHVf.342$Fl.170@fed1read09...
> Nick James wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:27:58 -0800, "0:->" <pohaku.kane@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You think their technology for targeting is any good? They can't even
> >>feed their people.
> >
> >
> > Like Katrina.
> > They are still finding bodies in 3rd world USA after 6 months.
> > The number of bodies found in Cuba...zero...because no one was killed.
>
> Last time I checked, Cuba wasn't BELOW sea level. Again, last time I
> checked, most of the (natural disaster) deaths were due to flooding in
> areas BELOW sea level.
>
> Most of the time in other cities ABOVE sea level, the number of deaths
> in hurricanes is pretty low, if any at all.
>
> Please, if you are going to try and draw conclusions for your agenda,
> whatever that is, use equivalent scenarios.
>
> > All you have to do is look at New Orleans to see the US is a baby step
from
> > being a third world country.
>
> Excellent. Therefore, using your corollary, we can presume that Canada
> is a baby step away from totalitarian control based on the way that your
> government runs the country.
>
> I'll take 3rd world any day over totalitarian.
Further, most of the people who died in new orleans died because their mayor
fucked up.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Goh: Why no upgrading for Huougang or Potong Pasir?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/29ee801ecd4f26cf
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 6:18 pm
From: "achtung"
I will contribute my Wed big sweep win
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 10:18 am
From: "....lobert...."
But even Chiam See Tong wanted to his Town Council money, his plan was
rejected.
Tweety wrote:
> On 26 Mar 2006 16:50:48 -0800, "Brayden" <braydenwong@fastmail.us> wrote:
>
> Of course if you vote for opposition let the opposition upgrade your wards.
> Dun think ppl will thank you for the donation $1,000. Do it maybe you should
> give $100,000???
>
> Hey, the ppl wanna opposition and they will live to regret it.
>
>
>
>> In the 1995 elections, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said to those
>> who might have been leaning toward the opposition: " In 20, 30 years'
>> time, the whole of Singapore will be bustling away, and your estate,
>> through your own choice, will be left behind. They become slums. "
>> Today, in 2006, Goh claims he is "worried" that Hougang and Potong
>> Pasir might never be upgraded.
>> Hello, upgrading is not paid for by the PAP. It is paid out of the
>> people of Singapore's tax money, plus a significant portion has to come
>>from the HDB dwellers themeselves. Why, in heaven's name, should
>> Hougang or Potong Pasir or any ward for that matter be denied the right
>> to upgrade (assuming the HDB dwellers even want the upgrade in the
>> first place, as some simply can't afford the high prices charged by Mah
>> Bow Tan)?
>> If these two wards are to be treated differently, perhaps the taxes
>> collected from the people there should be treated differently too e.g.
>> they should be used for the Town Council sinking funds instead of
>> wasting them on the million dollars buffoons who call themselves
>> Ministers. As a point of fact, if the funds are allocated by wards, we
>> are quite sure they will use the money far more effectively, unlike the
>> brain dead expenses of putting Mobile TV on buses or renaming Marina
>> Bay to Marina Bay. Yes, perhaps there should be a secession movement
>> of sorts, since Goh has declared the ruling party's bias so openly.
>> Alternatively, perhaps the wards should start their independent
>> upgrading fund towards which Singaporeans from all over the island can
>> contribute. I, for one, am prepared to pledge $1,000 tomorrow if they
>> start one immediately.
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 11:37 am
From: "1" <2>
If that the case, why don't they demolish these two constituency and renamed
it Huo Pasir and Potongang respectively and restart the election boundaries
or using GRC to envelop and swallow them off altogether?
"Brayden" <braydenwong@fastmail.us> wrote in message
news:1143420647.959605.145960@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> In the 1995 elections, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said to those
> who might have been leaning toward the opposition: " In 20, 30 years'
> time, the whole of Singapore will be bustling away, and your estate,
> through your own choice, will be left behind. They become slums. "
> Today, in 2006, Goh claims he is "worried" that Hougang and Potong
> Pasir might never be upgraded.
> Hello, upgrading is not paid for by the PAP. It is paid out of the
> people of Singapore's tax money, plus a significant portion has to come
> from the HDB dwellers themeselves. Why, in heaven's name, should
> Hougang or Potong Pasir or any ward for that matter be denied the right
> to upgrade (assuming the HDB dwellers even want the upgrade in the
> first place, as some simply can't afford the high prices charged by Mah
> Bow Tan)?
> If these two wards are to be treated differently, perhaps the taxes
> collected from the people there should be treated differently too e.g.
> they should be used for the Town Council sinking funds instead of
> wasting them on the million dollars buffoons who call themselves
> Ministers. As a point of fact, if the funds are allocated by wards, we
> are quite sure they will use the money far more effectively, unlike the
> brain dead expenses of putting Mobile TV on buses or renaming Marina
> Bay to Marina Bay. Yes, perhaps there should be a secession movement
> of sorts, since Goh has declared the ruling party's bias so openly.
> Alternatively, perhaps the wards should start their independent
> upgrading fund towards which Singaporeans from all over the island can
> contribute. I, for one, am prepared to pledge $1,000 tomorrow if they
> start one immediately.
>
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 11:38 am
From: "1" <2>
"Tweety" <birdman@bluewater.net> wrote in message
news:48oujaFl9rshU4@individual.net...
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 09:21:36 +0800, "Ironm@n" <ironman181@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>It is like a mother telling his boy, "No sweets for you if you are
>>naughty".
>>
>
> Doesn't every mother tell their kid? Or maybe your mother give you
> everything
> you wanna? No wonder you are a rotten kid.
>
You are very stupid indeed.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:47 pm
From: "Kantian"
he is after all a bird with a puny brain, don't expect much from him.
"1" <2> wrote in message
>
> You are very stupid indeed.
>
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Drinking Small Amounts Of Alcohol Regularly Reduces Risk Of Obesity
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/c4df29f72bf30ad6
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 2:44 am
From: "Don"
"Doug Miller"> wrote
> "Don"> wrote:
>>"tightwad"> wrote
>>> Pass The Beer!
>>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051205075940.htm
>>
>>*...a drink or two a few times a week...*
>>
>>So if a non-drinker drinks a few drinks a week they will lose weight?
>
> Clearly absurd. The study shows only an association between alcohol
> consumption and weight, and fails to demonstrate any sort of
> cause-and-effect
> relationship between the two. From the data presented, it is just as
> plausible
> (if not more so) to assume that being overweight causes people to consume
> less
> alcohol.
2 words
beer belly
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Child sex abuse, sexual dysfunction common in US, Australia
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/237a6a767cb02024
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 6:54 pm
From: "ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com"
Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
> The sexual abuse of children is common in Christian churches, the
> perpetrators are usually priests and other members of the clergy.
How many children were raped in churches in India last year? If you
don't know, how do you know it's common?
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 6:57 pm
From: "ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com"
Ashok wrote:
> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
> > Child sexual abuse, sexual dysfunction common in US, Australia
>
> American adults teach and practice oral sex to/with minors. I'm going
> to catch 'em on my cell phone cam and report them for sexual abuse.
How would you catch them on your cell phone? Does your phone have a
sensor to detect sex acts taking place within a large area and a
clairvoyant camera that can take pictures of an oral sex act taking
place behind locked doors a few blocks away? Or do these adults teach
at oral sex schools with known addresses such that you can drive up
there and catch them red-handed (or red-whatever)?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Build a wall!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/23de0343ff02a45e
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 6:36 pm
From: "Robert not Roberto"
"Frank Arthur" <Art@Arthurian.com> wrote in message
news:ELEVf.3504$KC3.3143@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> How about spendinh 3 trillion dollars to build a wall between USA &
> Mexico. What the hell! We spent 3 trillion dollars trying to build an
> Islamic nation in Iraq.
> With President Bush at the helm we wouldn't even have to raise taxes to
> pay for the wall. In fact there might be a general tax break again!
>
Why not put a bounty of $1000 on each illegal immigrant, dead or alive?
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 3:02 am
From: "Cut off his head! We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so
there's nothing left!"
Robert not Roberto wrote...
> "Frank Arthur" <Art@Arthurian.com> wrote in message
> news:ELEVf.3504$KC3.3143@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
>>How about spendinh 3 trillion dollars to build a wall between USA &
>>Mexico. What the hell! We spent 3 trillion dollars trying to build an
>>Islamic nation in Iraq.
>>With President Bush at the helm we wouldn't even have to raise taxes to
>>pay for the wall. In fact there might be a general tax break again!
>>
>
>
> Why not put a bounty of $1000 on each illegal immigrant, dead or alive?
But that won't solve the problem in Mexico. Mexico doesn't care
if they are killed, all it cares about is removing them from its
territory lest they revolt and overthrow the government. Mexico
might care a little about losing all those dollars they send back,
but its main priority is to remove them to keep the unemployment
rate from rising so high as to cause an economic implosion. A
wall would force the Mexican government to make real reforms or
be overthrown.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:46 pm
From: "MURS radios"
Cut off his head! We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so
there's nothing left! wrote:
>
> But that won't solve the problem in Mexico. Mexico doesn't care
> if they are killed, all it cares about is removing them from its
> territory lest they revolt and overthrow the government. Mexico
> might care a little about losing all those dollars they send back,
> but its main priority is to remove them to keep the unemployment
> rate from rising so high as to cause an economic implosion. A
> wall would force the Mexican government to make real reforms or
> be overthrown.
You've got the core of the problem nailed down. The MEXICAN GOVT. is
the REAL BAD GUY here, not the USA.
Building a wall is important, for a number of reasons, but fixing
Mexico's corrupt government is JOB #1.
- Stewart
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/California_Minutemen
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Where are all the great ruins of the Negro nations?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/5cfe37852f40f77c
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 9:56 pm
From: Voice Of Reason <>
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:16:41 -0800, Von Bailey
<ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 23:53:55 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:44:07 -0800, Von Bailey
>><ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 22:48:39 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 19:28:18 -0800, Von Bailey
>>>><ovbailey@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:55:03 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:59:18 -0500, Voice Of Reason <> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"James Crow" <dont_let_the_sun_go_down_on_you_bw@h.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:drrmvi$vfj$1@domitilla.aioe.org...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aztecs, Mayans, Egyptians, Babylonians, Chinese, Japanese, Europeans, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They all had their great buildings and their great empires with plenty of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ruins and evidence to show it. Egyptians are famous for their great
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pyramids, Aztecs and Mayans had temples and cities, Romans had colosseums,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chinese had the great wall... all evidence of great empires.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone help me find a link to the great Sub-Saharan Negro Pyramids, or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great Negro Wall, or how about the great paved roads connecting the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Greatand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Superior Negro Empires. I would like to see great stone Negro castles.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Evidence of bronze swords and armor, the great Negro Aqueducts that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spanned
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for miles, and the Great Negro Architectural bridges.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>So where are all these sub-Saharan nations that ya read about in books
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that existed before the War? How many? 20? 30? Name them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Three or four come to mind...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ghana, with a history that listed 44 Kings before Christ and as far
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>back as the 7th century BC. It was known as the "Land of Gold"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>because it supplied the mineral on an international basis and had an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>iron industry for over a thousand years. Using the Niger and lesser
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>rivers in the empire they were able to build a system of cities and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>towns that produced commercial goods for the world.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not as independent nation, but a collection of regional tribes, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>then later a British colony as part of its so-called Gold Coast.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ghana did not become a nation until 1957, 12 years *after* the War.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Try again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They imported salt, textiles, cowrie shells, brass, dates, figs,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pearls, fruit, sugar, dried rasins and hoone. Some of heir chief
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>exports were gold, ivory, rubber. In 1060, the impreial army numbered
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>200,000 of which 100,000 were mounted and 40,000 were expertly trained
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>bow and arrow brigades. Their most famous schools were Kumbi-Saleh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>and Dejenne (also known as Kumbi-Kumbi and Jenne respectively) and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>world renowned school called The University fo Sankore was at Timbuktu
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(just north of Ghana).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mali, under the rule of Muslim kings, the greatest of which was Mansa
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Musa, who wanted to be known as the greatest Black Muslim in all of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Africa. Under his rule Mali indulged in international trade. By the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>mid 1300's Mali was an empire of it's own right. It controled the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>salt mines of Taghaza, encompassed Nigeria in the east and Fulani in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the west.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nope. Mali become a nation in 1960.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Songhay, their most prosperous time during the 15th and 16th
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>centuries. It had a long history of dias (kings) that coul be traced
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>back to the 7th century. They had gained control over the main
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>caravan city in western Africa Gao. With this as a foundation they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>built a nation that lasted until the mid 1600s.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Mossi States, an amagamation of kingdoms with common values and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>kinship. The most prominent of which were Wagdug, Yatenga, Fada
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Gurma, Mamprussi and Dagomba. They had the most successful calvary in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Africa and stood their own against the empires of Mali and Songhay.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They had a political structure that started with a King of Kings (as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>each individual state had a govenor who had absolute control of his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>particular state) and a prime minister.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There are quite a few more. If you're really interested (and that's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>sarcastic as I know you aren't) you might start with Chancellor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Williams "The destruction of Black Civilization, Great issues of race
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>from 4500 B.C to 2000 A.D." It's where I got some of the information
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>above.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>These were not nations, but as you yourself quoted above, but loose
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>collections ("amalgamation of kingdoms") of tribes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Just look at the current state of the Congo for how they existed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>hundreds of years ago -- almost non-stop skirmishs between numerous
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>regional groups (tribes) and sometimes all-out warfare.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There was a time when the losers of these battles would be sold off by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the victors into slavery, and yes, pass through what is now known as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ghana on their way to the New World. So much for their "great ruins".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thank you for that 'non-referenced' pack of lies and ignorance about a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>place you have demonstrated supreme stupidity about. It appears that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>your entire knowledge of African history appears to be what you read
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>in the captions of National Geographic while looking for pictures of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>women's breast to jack off to ass a kid.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nice try but wrong all around. IF ya have facts (not wild-eyed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>guesses) that repudiate what I said, then post them right here .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I cited a book that backs up everything I've said and you have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>refernced NOTHING. There is plenty of evidence of nations and even
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>empires in sub-sahara africa and your stupidity and ignorance about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>them doesn't change that it the least. Your comments didn't do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything except demonstrate what you think.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>So what, anyone can write a book and say whatever they want. Nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>changes the fact that the colonial era ended after WW II.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Which is irrelevant wrt the nations in Ancient Africa.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>WHAT "nations"?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Already listed by me and others.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>How do those places that you listed qualify as "nations"?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Because they fit the definition.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Which is??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You don't know yet you feel you have the ability to distinguish if one
>>>>>>>exists. Another little thing that makes you look stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wrong, I DO know what the definition is, the question is whether YOU
>>>>>>do or not.
>>>>>
>>>>>No. Since I have given examples of what I called african
>>>>>civilizations you must demonstrate that they don't fit the definition.
>>>>>But you can't because you're so ignorant that you didn't even know
>>>>>they existed.
>>>>
>>>>No. I shouldn't be doing YOUR homework for you. You made the claim
>>>>that they were nations, so show *how* they really had attributes of
>>>>nations.
>>>>
>>>What else do you need? I told you what book to check and I told you
>>>what the names of the nations were. The book that I referenced calls
>>>them nations and it gives the evidence that supports it. Granted
>>>you'd have to actually read a book on Africa to get the evidence but
>>>you claim you've read books so that's shouldn't be a problem.
>>
>>Calling a group of people a "nation" doesn't quite cut it. Let's see
>>the specific evidence that made them more than just a tribe, at best.
>
>As I said, the evidence is in the book.
>
>Chancellor Williams "The destruction of Black Civilization, Great
>issues of race from 4500 B.C to 2000 A.D."
>
>Why don't you read the book? To many words for you? I say the book
>provides the evidence you need. Until you read the book and can
>dispute the evidence in the book all you're doing is avoiding looking
>at the evidence in order to make pointless arguments. Your best
>trait.
I'm not going to do your homework. YOU made the claim, now spit out
the evidence, or else retract the claim.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: SO, HE WANTS TO "DEFEND ISRAEL"!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/81766c3f68a09fd4
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 3:07 am
From: "Salah Jafar"
He is talking so they can help him build his Library, He can hardly wait to get out of office because he is sick of the Jooz as much as everyone around the world.
SJ
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 10:13 pm
From: "serwad"
"Salah Jafar" <codeman@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4GIVf.5135$W75.879@trnddc07...
He is talking so they can help him build his Library, He can hardly wait to
get out of office because he is sick of the Jooz as much as everyone around
the world.
SJ
You might be right! I doubt that even his twins would volunteer to defend
Kikeland! Unless of course they offer them free heroin injections!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: LAYING BARE THE MYTH OF EVOLUTION -----> "HEY, The Emperor Has NO
Clothes!" <-----
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/caa7db9ffa45af08
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 9:07 pm
From: Nosmo King
"Liberal Ass Kicker"
<REMOVE_THIS_IF_YOU_LOVE_THE_US_liberalasskicker@liberalsmustdie.com>
wrote in news:1143422255.469772.212100@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> Hey I totally agree with your weird rambling, posting of links to image
> files, and strange list of a bunch of politicans!!
>
> Even thought your post makes no sense, I get the point. Evolution is a
> joke!
>
> Ask any scientist in the world to proven that evolution is true and
> know what they will tell you? "I can't prove it, it's just a theory."
>
> EXACTLY!!!!
>
> Checkmate.
>
> -----------------------------------
> Liberal Ass Kicker
> www.liberalsmustdie.com
>
>
A theory is the collection of facts which proves the hypothesis. So, yes,
it's a theory. The theory PROVES that the hypothesis is true based on all
of the observable facts. You right wing assholes are soooo ignorant of
basic science. Don't you have chicken out in the back yard that you
haven't fucke yet?
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 9:08 pm
From: Nosmo King
Ed Conrad <edconrad@verizon.net> wrote in
news:l33d22h7ffg406f74n5oo7e3a33u16a0aj@4ax.com:
>> EVOLUTION -- GREATEST COVERUP
>> IN THE HISTORY OF HISTORY
> <
>> "Any suggestion that scientists
>> so dearly love truth, that they
>> have not the slightest hesitation
>> in jettisoning their beliefs, is
>> a mean perversion of the facts."
>> I. Bernard Cohen
>> (professor of history and science
>> at Harvard University)
> <
> as stated in "The Velikovsky Affair:
> The Warfare Between Science and Scientism"
Emmanual Velikovsky (Worlds in Collision) is one huge discredited fruit
cake. If you are using him to bolster any arguements, then you've lost
before you start.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
==============================================================================
TOPIC: What makes a religion valid?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/692fbde3edebb694
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:16 pm
From: "ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com"
luigi wrote:
> "harmony" <aka@hotmail.com> wrote ...
> > "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1234@bigpond.com> wrote ...
> >> Andre wrote:
> >> > I don't think religion is the source of morality.
> >> I do. Certainly my religion is.
> >> >Religion is an invention.
That doesn't prevent a religion from being a repository of morality.
> >> >If anything, religion is the source of immorality.
> >> Your religion may be that. Or I should hope, your understanding of
> >> your religion may be that.
>
> In the absence of God, how does one define the word morality?
In the presence of God, how does one define the word morality?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: ZIONAZI DERSHOWITZ-PLAGIARIST AND A LIAR!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/e0ce0cabb8470242
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 10:18 pm
From: "serwad"
"bernardz" <bernardz@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1143366849.523988.74090@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> serwad wrote:
>> PROFESSOR ALAN DERSHOWITZ
>>
>> (This is the summary of the Dershowitz plagiarism story contained in our
>> e-mail of September 16, 2004, slightly edited in response to helpful
>> suggestions from a professor who commented on the e-mail.)
>>
>> The second Harvard plagiarism story was broken in September 2003 and
>> involves Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz. It concerns his
>> 2003
>> book, "A Case For Israel" in which, according to one reviewer, Professor
>> Dershowitz engages in an "orgy of plagiarism," committing "wholesale,
>> unacknowledged looting" of research from an earlier book addressing the
>> same
>> subject. (http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09262003.html)
>>
>> Specifically, it has been reported that 22 of the 52 endnotes to the
>> first
>> two chapters of Professor Dershowitz's book were lifted straight from a
>> 1984
>> book by Joan Peters, "From Time Immemorial," without attribution. These
>> 22
>> endnotes contain not just the citations from Peters' footnotes, but also
>> extensive quotations from the cited sources set forth in Peters'
>> footnotes.
>>
>> Professor Dershowitz's response to these reports was, at least initially,
>> to
>> say he had done nothing even remotely questionable. Among other things,
>> he
>> represented that while writing the book he had independent knowledge of
>> the
>> underlying sources based on his earlier research, and he stated it was
>> hardly surprising he and Peters would cite some commonly consulted
>> sources.
>> In the radio interview in which he first confronted the charges,
>> Professor
>> Dershowitz stated that while he of course had read Peters' book, which
>> "anybody writing a book on the Middle East would" do, he had also read
>> "independently probably 30 or 40 other books which use the same quotes,
>> they're
>> very extensively used . . . ."
>> http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4825.htm. Professor
>> Dershowitz also accused his critics of being ideologically opposed to him
>> and made various ad hominem attacks on them.
>>
>> These ad hominem attacks apparently backfired, energizing Professor
>> Dershowitz's critics and leading them to investigate further. Ultimately
>> Professor Dershowitz's claim that he'd done nothing wrong, but had merely
>> cited some commonly consulted sources which he'd found in 30 or 40 other
>> books, sources which Peters had happened also to cite, was challenged
>> with
>> what his critics characterized as "smoking gun" evidence obtained from a
>> reviewer of Professor Dershowitz's book. This reviewer had kept the
>> advance
>> uncorrected proofs he'd been sent by the publisher, and the reviewer
>> forwarded them to the scholar who had first noticed Professor
>> Dershowitz's
>> plagiarism, Norman Finkelstein.
>>
>> These advance uncorrected proofs contained Professor Dershowitz's own
>> handwritten note to a research assistant directing her to copy Peters'
>> footnotes into the manuscript of his own book. The note read: "Holly
>> Beth:
>> cite sources of pp. 160, 485, 486 [of Peters' book], fns 141-45." Only
>> after
>> these advance uncorrected proofs were discovered to be in the hands of
>> his
>> critics did Professor Dershowitz then assert that the advance uncorrected
>> proofs actually supported his claim of innocence, which raises the
>> question
>> why he did not produce them earlier. (See
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=5 (Dershowitz
>> letter
>> and Cockburn reply)) It would seem plausible to assume Professor
>> Dershowitz
>> would not have initially denied lifting Peters' footnotes, and would not
>> have stated he just happened to find the same commonly cited sources in
>> 30
>> or 40 other books he'd read, if he had realized his publisher had sent to
>> book reviewers advance uncorrected proofs containing what his critics
>> characterize as "smoking gun" evidence in his own handwriting proving
>> Dershowitz's initial statements false.
>>
>> Further evidence that Professor Dershowitz lied in an effort to cover up
>> his
>> plagiarism, his critics argue, can be found in the fact that the
>> footnotes
>> in Peters' book contain some mistakes in the quotations and citations,
>> and
>> use ellipses in the quotations, and the very same mistakes and ellipses
>> appear in the endnotes of Professor Dershowitz's book - proving, his
>> critics
>> argue, that they were simply copied verbatim from Peters' book, and
>> Professor Dershowitz didn't even check the original sources to see
>> whether
>> the quotations and citations to them in Peters' book were accurate. (See
>> http://www.thecrimson.com/today/article349123.html)
>>
>> For background concerning the Dershowitz plagiarism story, see:
>>
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=1
>>
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=4&ar=1
>>
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=4
>>
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=5
>>
>> http://hnn.us/articles/1735.html
>>
>> http://www.democracynow.org/static/dershowitzFin.shtml
>>
>> http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09262003.html
>>
>> http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Finkelstein/HarvardCrimson_0.html
>>
>> http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=349044
>>
>> http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=349031
>>
>> http://www.thecrimson.com/today/article349123.html
>>
>> http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=349122
>>
>> http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/1162
>>
>> http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/spinoza10022003
>>
>> http://buffaloreport.com/articles/031012cockburn.dershowitz.html
>>
>> http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=20220
>>
>> http://www.hlrecord.org/news/2003/10/16/Opinion/Letters.To.The.Editor-530895.shtml
>>
>>
>>
>> OgletreeSkeptics@yahoo.com
>> [cc] (see http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html;
>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0)
>
>
>
> Finkelstein is not a credible historian. Finkelsteins writes, "It is
> hard to make out any difference between the policy Dershowitz advocates
> and the Nazi destruction of Lidice, for which he expresses
> abhorrence-except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing it."
> (p. 176). I've been reading Dershowitz for a long time, and comparing
> his mild proposals for dealing with terrorism with the Lidice massacre
> of 1942 is just batty.
That is because the only "terrorism" you recognize as such is the one
directed against the fascist state of israel!
The stat terrorism of Israel aganst the Palestinian people is far worse than
the terrorism of Adolf Hitler against the people of Lidice! Nazis executed
100 Czschs for the Lidice assassination, Zionist nazis killed millions of
Palestinians in order to steal their land!
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:37 pm
From: "joe six pack"
bernardz wrote:
>
> Finkelstein is not a credible historian. Finkelsteins writes, "It is
> hard to make out any difference between the policy Dershowitz advocates
> and the Nazi destruction of Lidice, for which he expresses
> abhorrence-except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing it."
> (p. 176). I've been reading Dershowitz for a long time, and comparing
> his mild proposals for dealing with terrorism with the Lidice massacre
> of 1942 is just batty.
>
> Dershowitz actually wrote in the passage Finkelstein cites: "[Israel]
> would then publicly declare precisely how it will respond in the event
> of another terrorist act, such as by destroying empty houses in a
> particular village that has been used as a base for terrorists, and
> naming that village in advance."
>
> Um ... "destroying empty houses" doesn't exactly sound like genocide to
> me
question is, how those houses got empty ?!
is there a surplus of housing in the palestinian lands ?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: UKRAINE <> USA ?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/55afac663ffe042a
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:24 pm
From: "UKRAINE-USA"
Hi. I am trying to create a web site about ukraine-usa relationships
and relations http://www.geocities.com/ukraine4americans , and I wonder
what's the general image of Ukraine in the usa? I mean what the
mainstream joe or jane might think when she/he heards the word
"Ukraine"? I am realy sincer about asking this, and thanks a lot in
advance for any answers. Natasha from Ukraine.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: NOBODY IS AFRAID OF ISRAEL OR U.S. ANY MORE
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/219d49830c13ed03
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 27 2006 3:38 am
From: "Mexican Bandolero"
Hey sewerwad, want to see and show a picture of your corrupted ass?
Just say the word!
MB
"serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:TkqVf.3953$Pe.1262@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> BOTH ARE BUNKRUPTED, BOTH TECHNOLOGICALLY AND MORALLY TO SAY NOTHING ABOUT
> THE ECONOMIC DEMISE OF ISRAEL, WHICH CANNOT FEED ITSELF FOR A MONTH
> WITHOUT LEECHING ONTO UNITED STATES TAXPAYER!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: EINSTEIN-PHONY.LIAR,PLAGIARIST!
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/252ea6d968f0cf6d
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 26 2006 7:45 pm
From: "serwad"
Albert Einstein (March 14, 1879-April 18, 1955) was a Jewish theoretical
physicist from Germany, who is regarded by many as the greatest scientist of
the 20th century. He was awarded the 1921 Nobel Prize for Physics for his
explanation of the photoelectric effect and "for his services to Theoretical
Physics."
It is widely believed that Einstein proposed the theory of relativity, but
this is a gross exaggeration. Einstein plagiarized most ideas of Special
Relativity from Henri Poincaré and Hendrik Lorentz, in one of the most
clear-cut cases of plagiarism in the history of science. He does deserve
credit for proposing, in a joint work with the mathematician Marcel
Grossmann, to use pseudo-Riemannian Geometry for the mathemtical description
of gravity. This started the development of General Relativity. The field
equations of this theory are usually attributed to Einstein, but it was in
fact David Hilbert who obtained them first. Einstein plagiarized Hilbert's
result, again in one of the most clear-cut cases of plagiarism in the
history of science.
Einstein also worked on quantum physics, statistical mechanics and
cosmology. By the early 1920s, he had achieved celebrity status. This is in
part due to the desire of the powerful Jewish press to create a popular
figurehead for Zionism and Jewish supremacism by making his name synonymous
with great intelligence and even genius. Einstein's popularity was used for
Jewish campaigns ever since, see for instance the illustration of the 2005
Economist article[1] about the alleged intellectual superiority of the Jews.
It is a remarkable fact that at least two of the depicted persons, namely
Einstein and Mahler, can by reasonable standards be considered to be
plagiarists.
After the 1933 Revolution in Germany, Einstein emigrated to the United
States.
Personality and family live
Einstein had met the Serbian Mileva Maric in 1896. She had started initially
as a medical student at the University of Zurich, but after a term switched
to the same section as Einstein as the only woman that year to study for the
same diploma. Einstein's relationship with Mileva developed into romance
over the next few years. He and Mileva had an illegitimate daughter Lieserl,
born in January 1902.
Einstein married Mileva Maric on January 6, 1903. They had two sons after
their marriage: Hans Albert Einstein, born on May 14, 1904, and Eduard, born
on July 28, 1910.
Albert's marriage to Mileva, who was a mathematician, was both a personal
and intellectual partnership: Einstein referred to Mileva as "a creature who
is my equal and who is as strong and independent as I am". It is a disputed
question how much she contributed to Einstein's 1905 papers.
Einstein divorced Mileva on February 14, 1919, and married his cousin Elsa
Löwenthal (born Einstein: Löwenthal was the surname of her first husband,
Max) on June 2, 1919. The divorce contract stipulated that Mileva was to
receive the prize money if Albert should ever receive the Nobel prize. Elsa
Löwenthal was Albert's first cousin (maternally) and his second cousin
(paternally). She was three years older than Albert, and had nursed him to
health after he had suffered a partial nervous breakdown combined with a
severe stomach ailment; there were no children from this marriage.
Albert Einstein's attitude towards his children was cool. The fate of Albert
and Mileva's first child, Lieserl, is unknown. Some believe she died in
infancy, while others believe she was given out for adoption. The youngest
son Eduard intended to practice as a Freudian analyst but apparently
developed schizophrenia. Albert ignored him completely, it was Mileva who
cared for him until her death in 1948. Eduard died 1965 in an asylum.
The older son Hans Albert became a professor of hydraulic engineering at the
University of California, Berkeley, having little interaction with his
father. He adopted a girl Evelyn, who is said to have been sired by Einstein
during a short relation with a dancer in his later years. The adoption might
be difficult to explain by other reasons.
A recent theory about Albert Einstein's mental development is that he had
Asperger's syndrome, a condition related to autism. This may explain the
inclination to violent outbursts during his childhood and his cool behaviour
towards his children. It may also explain his problematic attitude to the
intellectual property of Poincaré and Hilbert, which we are going to
describe later on in this article.
[edit]The so-called Annus Mirabilis Papers
In 1904, Einstein's position at the Swiss Patent Office was made permanent.
He obtained his doctorate after submitting his thesis "A new determination
of molecular dimensions" ("Eine neue Bestimmung der Moleküldimensionen") in
1905. This is usually considered to be his most fruitful year, his annus
mirabilis (miracle year), in which he wrote four articles which are said to
be of fundamental importance to the foundation of modern physics. Most
physicists agree that three of those papers (on Brownian motion, the
photoelectric effect, and special relativity) deserved Nobel Prizes.
One can, however, argue that most of the edifice of special relativity was
erected by Poincaré and Lorentz. This leaves the papers on Brownian motion
and on the photoelectric effect. They are indeed of outstanding importance.
But not every paper of outstanding importance for the foundations of modern
physics won a Nobel Price for its authors. For instance, their 1954 papers
on non-Abelian gauge fields, which became crucial for our understanding for
both the weak and strong interaction, did not win a second Nobel price for
Chen Ning Yang nor a Nobel price for the late Robert Mills.
It is often claimed that Einstein wrote his 1905 papers without much
scientific literature to which he could refer or many scientific colleagues
with whom he could discuss the theories. Both assertions sound quite
far-fetched. Einstein finished his thesis in 1905 and certainly used
scientific literature to do so. During these years was a scientist working
for the patent office in Bern, a city having a university since 1834. At
least for the non-expert, it sounds highly unlikely that Einstein had no
access to a scientific library. Moreover, Solovine's testimony quoted above
is strong evidence that Einstein was aware of Poincaré's theory about the
relativity of simultaneity, although he did not acknowledge this source in
the 1905 papers. One motive for reiterating this bizarre assertion about
Einstein working without access to the scientific literature could be the
desire to defend him against the suspicions of plagiarism which are raised
by his first 1905 relativity paper. The same holds for the assertion that he
had no experts to talk to. He certainly discussed these papers with Mileva,
but she probably was no expert and the importance of her influence on Albert
is debated. But Bern was connected to the postal system in 1905, and we know
that in 1905 Einstein was aware of at least some work of Poincaré and
Lorentz, who is mentioned in the relativity paper. Einstein could have asked
either scientist about the recent developments in the theory of
electromagnetism.
[edit]The photoelectric effect
The first Annus mirabilis paper, named "On a Heuristic Viewpoint Concerning
the Production and Transformation of Light", ("Über einen die Erzeugung und
Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtspunkt")
introduced light quanta, nowadays called photons. Moreover it explained the
photo-electric effect, which had been discovered in 1902 by Philipp Lenard,
as a quantum phenomenon. Max Planck had introduced his quantum hypothesis,
that radiation can be emitted and absorbed only in quanta proportional to
the frequency of the radiation, in 1901 to explain the observed behaviour of
black-body radiation.
Einstein's quantum hypothesis contradicted the well-established wave nature
of electromagnetic radiation (such as light) and for this reason was not
accepted for a long time. Planck rejected it initially while he was quick to
adopt special relativity.
While Einstein is probably most popular for his alledged role in the
development of relativity, it is this paper which was specifically cited for
his Nobel Prize.
[edit]Brownian Motion
His second article in 1905, named "On the Motion-Required by the Molecular
Kinetic Theory of Heat-of Small Particles Suspended in a Stationary Liquid",
("Über die von der molekularkinetischen Theorie der Wärme geforderte
Bewegung von in ruhenden Flüssigkeiten suspendierten Teilchen") covered his
study of Brownian motion, and provided empirical evidence for the existence
of atoms. To explain Brownian motion had been an open problem for some time,
but the polish physicist Smoluchowski arrived at the same mathematical
result independently at about the same time, and the solution was at least
in principle known before 1905. In his St. Louis lecture [Poi04c, p. 29],
after recalling some of the earlier, wrong theories, Poincaré describes the
correct explanation:
The larger bodies, those of a tenth of a millimeter, for example, are
bombarded from all sides by the moving atoms, but they do not stir, because
these shocks are so numerous that the law of probabilities requires them to
compensate each other; but the smaller particles are hit too rarely to have
this compensation take place with any degree of certainty and are thus
incessantly tossed around.
It is often claimed that Einstein's Brownian motion paper influenced the hot
debate between physicists and chemists whether atoms were real entities or
just a useful concept. Einstein's statistical discussion of atomic behavior
gave experimentalists a way to count atoms by looking through an ordinary
microscope. Wilhelm Ostwald, one of the leaders of the anti-atom school,
later told Arnold Sommerfeld that he had been converted to a belief in atoms
by Einstein's complete explanation of Brownian motion.
Brownian motion also was to become an important subject of 20th century pure
and applied mathematics. This mathematical theory was certainly influenced
by Einstein's work, but the paper which initiated it is a 1901 paper (based
upon his 1900 thesis) of Louis Bachelier. Einstein may have been unaware of
this paper. As far as these mathematical aspects of the theory are
concerned,
Bachelier's treatment and understanding of the theory of Brownian Motion
(originally called Brownian Movement) is more elegant and mathematical than
in Einstein's 1905 paper. While Einstein had an unsurpassed 'nose' for
physics his nose for mathematics was, by his own admission, not so highly
developed.[2]
[edit]Special Relativity
Einstein's third paper that year, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"
("Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper"), was published in September 1905.
While developing this paper, Einstein wrote to Mileva about "our work on
relative motion", and this has led some to ask whether Mileva played a part
in its development. It is widely believed that this paper introduced the
special theory of relativity, a theory of time, distance, mass and energy
which was consistent with electromagnetism, but omitted the force of
gravity.
There has, however, always been a minority opinion which considered special
relativity as the invention of Poincaré. One example is Whittaker [Whi53],
who uses "The relativity theory of Poincaré and Lorentz" as the title for
the section on special relativity. For other examples, see [Bje02] and the
links of XTX Inc. webpage on Bjerknes', in particular Logunov's book on
Poincaré's contribution to special relativity. For the sake of keeping the
length of this article reasonable, we have to defer the detailed discussion
of these priority issues to the article about the history of special
relativity. Some quotations from Poincaré's work will be given below in the
section about the accusations of plagiarism against Einstein.
A fourth paper, "Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy
Content?", ("Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt
abhängig?") published late in 1905, showed one further deduction from
relativity's axioms, the famous equation that the energy of a body at rest
(E) equals its mass (m) times the speed of light (c) squared: E = mc2 .
While Einstein's deduction of this result probably was new, the correctness
of his deduction is debated and the formula itself had been established in
1900 by Poincaré, at least for electromagnetic radiation. Again, a detailed
discussion of this question belongs not to this article but to the history
of special relativity.
As was mentioned before, Einstein is most famous for allegedly
single-handedly creating the impressive edifice of relativity theory.
However, he was awarded the Nobel Prize primarily for his theory of the
photoelectric effect. This is often (for instance, in the Dec. 16., 2005
version of the English wikipedia article on Einstein) explained as being
motivated by the fact that "his work on general relativity was still
disputed" in 1921. Einstein's version of the quantum hypothesis was,
however, at least as disputed as relativity. Planck, who had accepted
special relativity immediately, was very reluctant to accept it. In [Sta89,
p. xvii], it is stated that by "1909 the theory of relativity was well on
its way to general acceptance, if not full comprehension, while Einstein's
views on the nature of radiation were becoming the subject of intense
controversy." This casts a shadow of doubt upon the aforementioned
explanation of the Nobel commission's decision to prefer Einstein's 1905
photon paper to his special relativity papers. The hypothesis that some
members of the commission doubted the originality of Einstein's work on
special relativity, and may even have considered it to be an act of
plagiarism, may be a more reasonable explanation. The German wikipedia
article also attributes this decision to the commission's awareness of the
prior work of Poincaré and Lorentz, but wrongly states that Poincaré
believed in the existence of an absolute time.
[edit]Middle Years
In 1906, Einstein was promoted to technical examiner second class. In 1908,
Einstein was licensed in Bern, Switzerland, as a Privatdozent (unsalaried
teacher at a university). Einstein's second son, Eduard, was born on July
28, 1910. In 1911, Einstein became first associate professor at the
University of Zurich, and shortly afterwards full professor at the (German)
University of Prague, only to return the following year to Zurich in order
to become full professor at the ETH Zurich.
[edit]General relativity
Einstein's most important result of the Zurich years is a 1913 paper
proposing a new kind of field theory of gravity. Einstein wrote the physics
part, while his friend Marcel Grossmann wrote the mathematics part. This
problem had for the first time been attacked by Poincaré in his 1906 paper
on the dynamics of the electron. In 1907, Planck had proposed that all
energy should gravitate, and later that year Einstein's first paper on the
subject had appeared. At this time, the theory concentrated upon a scalar
theory of gravity: the gravity field was to be described by a single
potential as in Newton's theory.
The main new idea contained in the Einstein/Grossmann paper of 1913, the
so-called "Entwurf" (outline) paper, was the description of gravity in terms
of pseudo-Riemannian geometry. While the Entwurf theory shares this feature
with the final theory, which came to be known as general relativity, the
field equations proposed in the Entwurf paper turned out to be untenable.
These field equations must be chosen to connect the geometric invariants of
the pseudo-Riemannian space with the stress-energy tensor of the matter
generating the gravity field, and this must be done in such a way that
certain conditions related to the conservation of momentum and energy are
satisfied. Without the correct field equations, the emergent theory of
gravity could be compared to a theory of electromagnetism which proposes the
correct type of fields to describe electromagnetism while lacking equations
for the electromagnetic field generated by charged bodies in motion.
In 1914, just before the start of World War I, Einstein settled in Berlin as
professor at the local university and became a member of the Prussian
Academy of Sciences. He took German citizenship. From 1914 to 1933, he
served as director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics in Berlin.
Until December 1915, Einstein devoted most of his research activity to the
search for the correct field equations of gravity. He published several sets
of equations, all of them turning out to be untenable. The situation took a
dramatic turn in 1915, when Einstein learned that the eminent mathematician
David Hilbert had started to work on this problem. Einstein started a last
desperate attempt to arrive at the correct solution first. In early
November, he submitted two papers containing new sets of closely related
field equations, also giving talks about these papers. Within a few weeks,
he would have to give up these new equations as he had to give up their
predecessors. On November 13, Hilbert informed Einstein that he had derived
field equations for gravity and invited Einstein to attend his November 16
lecture on the subject. Einstein declined to come but asked for more written
information. Hilbert sent him a postcard, most likely (the postcard is lost)
containing the correct field equations. Moreover, Einstein obtained the
notes from Hilbert's lecture taken by Walter Baade [Wue05, p. 74].
On November 18., Einstein gave a talk in Berlin devoted to the solution of
an old and important problem of celestial mechanics, the anomalous
perihelion motion of Mercury, based upon a wrong reasoning using the false
field equations Einstein had obtained so far. Also on November 18., Einstein
confirmed the arrival of Hilbert's postcard on November 18, wrongly claiming
Hilbert's field equations to be identical to the ones Einstein had submitted
in early November. On November 25, Einstein submitted a slightly modified
version of Hilbert's field equations as his own. Finally, he slandered
Hilbert in a November 26 letter to Heinrich Zangger, accusing him of
attempts to 'nostrify' (steal) Einstein's theory.
This is in my opinion the most likely reconstruction of the November 1915
events. A rebuttal of some alternative versions will be given in the WN Wiki
article about a 1997 Corry Renn Stachel paper which attempted to establish
Einstein's priority for the field equations and which achieved much
attention at the time, even in the daily press, but which has been totally
discredited after a few years.
In 1919, predictions made using the theory were confirmed by Arthur
Eddington's measurements (during a solar eclipse), of how much the light
emanating from a star was bent by the Sun's gravity when it passed close to
the Sun, an effect called gravitational lensing. The observations were
carried out on May 29, 1919, at two locations, one in Sobral, Ceará, Brazil,
and another in the island of Principe, in the west coast of Africa. On
November 7, The Times reported the confirmation, cementing Einstein's fame.
[edit]The controversy around Einstein in the Weimar Republic
[edit]The "Copenhagen" interpretation
Einstein's relationship with quantum physics was quite remarkable. His
postulation that light can be described not only as a wave with no kinetic
energy, but also as massless discrete packets of energy called quanta with
measurable kinetic energy (now known as photons) marked a major step in the
development of quantum physics. In 1909 Einstein presented his first paper
on the quantification of light to a gathering of physicists and told them
that they must find some way to understand waves and particles together.
In the mid-1920s, as the original quantum theory was replaced with a new
theory of quantum mechanics, Einstein balked at the Copenhagen
interpretation of the new equations because it settled for a probabilistic,
non-visualizable account of physical behaviour. Einstein agreed that the
theory was the best available, but he looked for a more "complete"
explanation, i.e., more deterministic. He could not abandon the belief that
physics described the laws that govern "real things", the belief which had
led to his successes with atoms, photons, and gravity.
In a 1926 letter to Max Born, Einstein made a remark that is now famous:
Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me it is
not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us
any closer to the secret of the Old One. I, at any rate, am convinced that
He does not throw dice.
To this, Bohr, who sparred with Einstein on quantum theory, retorted, "Stop
telling God what He must do!" The Bohr-Einstein debates on foundational
aspects of quantum mechanics happened during the Solvay conferences.
These discussions played an important role for the development of our
understanding of quantum mechanics. The same holds for the famous
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper[3] written in 1935, after Einstein had
emigrated to the US. The paper tried to present a way to bypass the
uncertainty principle by studying the decomposition of a system of two
particles followed by the measurement of incompatible observables, like
position and momentum, at a time when the two pieces are a far distance
apart. The initial system was to be prepared in such a way that conservation
laws allow for sharp measurements of both observables for both pieces to be
obtained from this information. A version which has actually been carried
out considers different components of the polarization of photons emitted in
a cascade process. These experiments resulted in the confirmation of quantum
mechanics.
Einstein's opposition to quantum mechanics is often described by the above
quotation, the God does not throw dice. There is, however, a difference
between an indeterministic theory which still allows for a description of
the state of an individual object and a theory allowing only ensemble
states. For instance, there are proposals of modification of quantum
mechanics describing individual objects by a psi-function which satisfies a
stochastic differential equation, and there are interpretations of quantum
mechanics allowing only ensemble states, considering psi-functions as a
convenient tool to study certain classes of density matrices. The latter
position would have profound implications for our understanding of
microphysical reality, partially reverting the general acceptance of the
real existence of atoms which Einstein's Brownian motion paper helped to
establish. The fact that the EPR paper is concerned with the question of how
quantum mechanics describes reality perhaps indicates that this question was
more important to Einstein than the determinism issue.
[edit]Bose-Einstein statistics
In 1924, Einstein received a short paper from a young Indian physicist named
Satyendra Nath Bose describing light as a gas of photons and asking for
Einstein's assistance in publication. Einstein realized that the same
statistics could be applied to atoms, and published an article in German
(then the lingua franca of physics) which described Bose's model and
explained its implications. Bose-Einstein statistics now describe any
assembly of these indistinguishable particles known as bosons. The
Bose-Einstein condensate phenomenon was predicted in the 1920s by Bose and
Einstein, based on Bose's work on the statistical mechanics of photons,
which was then formalized and generalized by Einstein. The first such
condensate was produced by Eric Cornell and Carl Wieman in 1995 at the
University of Colorado at Boulder. Einstein's original sketches on this
theory were recovered in August 2005 in the library of Leiden University
(see website with original manuscript: [4]).
==============================================================================
TOPIC:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/browse_thread/thread/
==============================================================================
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "soc.culture.usa"
group.
To post to this group, send email to soc.culture.usa@googlegroups.com or visit
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to soc.culture.usa-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.usa/subscribe
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com
