http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books?hl=en
rec.arts.books@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* INDIA SAYS "Fuck You" To Global Warming INDUSTRY! (So Do We!) - 2 messages,
1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/d161d1e5dcce849c?hl=en
* Okay, on to the Ardennes - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/f472bf8a540c8434?hl=en
* The Books That Founded D&D - 10 messages, 9 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/8ba57c69243a3499?hl=en
* 10 Reasons Why YOU Should Join Us - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/fa6a99fdd0b9e13f?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: INDIA SAYS "Fuck You" To Global Warming INDUSTRY! (So Do We!)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/d161d1e5dcce849c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 2:27 pm
From: Arindam Banerjee
On Nov 25, 4:40 am, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> news:sVEOm.57037$ze1.19932@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > It may well be that the Himalayan glaciers are melting more than usual,
> but
>
> > the point is that they are not melting as fast as those in Europe or USA,
>
> I agree but it seems the prime minister of Nepal doesn't ...
>
> September 1 2009
>
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/08c1b2f0-96f8-11de-9c24-00144feabdc0.html
>
> "Speaking at a two-day Himalayan climate change conference in Kathmandu,
> Madhav Kumar, Nepal's prime minister, said: "The Himalayan glaciers are
> retreating faster than any other glaciers in the world as the temperature is
> increasing."
Are we going to believe in politicians now? This matter is far too
important to be decided by the statement of some politician. I am not
saying that he is wrong, though. Glaciers may be retreating in Nepal
and Alaska, but we have to see the true causes, and one way is to
measure the rates of retreat and match them with the quantity of
carbon dioxide in the local region. We have Indian scientists on the
field making a point, which is contrary to the point made by Western
scientists who evidently want the facts to suit their pet theories.
To give another example - the Western scientists have been saying that
Bangladesh will be inundated by rising sea-waters. So the land will
shrink. But the Bangladeshi scientists have not seen anything of
this, over the last ten years. If anything, the land area has
increased as a result of continuous silting. The point is that if
thirdworld scientists blindly believe whatever they hear from the
firstworld scientists, they will lead their nations into dire
trouble.
To quote Sherlock Holmes: Facts first, theories afterwards. To doctor
facts (ignore some, twist some) to suit pet theories, is the greatest
villainy a scientist can do. No engineer can follow such corrupt
scientists. The pity is that the world is not run by engineers, even
though engineers have made the modern world.
> > I also note that you have overlooked my main point.
>
> I don't agree with your assertion that it's all down to C02 produced by
> aircraft.
Let us see what points you make.
>That is quickly dispersed around the world by the jet stream and
> weather.
The point is density/concentration of pollution. How much of it (the
carbon dioxide) produced in a region stays in or near the region. Of
course the Carbon Dioxide will get dispersed, but it will not get
dispersed immediately. There will be varying concentrations, and the
concentration will be most at and around the places where the
pollution was created the most. Thus since aeroplanes fly less over
the Himalayas, there will be less pollution over the Himalayas - what
their is will be from the diffusion from the areas where the pollution
was the highest. Always, at the place where the source of pollution
is, the pollution density will be the highest.
There are plenty of examples of global transport...Sand from the
> Sahara desert turns up thousands of miles away including in England,
> radiation from Chernobyl travelled to China and Canada. Sulphur from English
> coal fired power stations caused acid rain across Europe etc.
Fair enough. Traces will be found. Surely you are not trying to make
the point that the concentration of sand (measured by mass of Sahara
sand per unit area) from the Sahara found in England is anywhere near
the density of Sahara sound found in the Sahara. I have no doubt that
a fair amount of carbon dioxide produced by jet planes flying over
Alaska finds its way over the Himalayas, and thus causes glacier
retreat. Now we compare the rates, on a factual basis, for glacier
retreats in the Himalayas and in Alaska. Here there is a problem.
The rates in Alaska are beyond controversy, while those in the
Himalayas certainly are controversial.
> But you do have a point about pollution. Pollution makes snow and ice dirty
> which causes it to absorb more sunlight and reflect less heat back into
> space.
At least we agree on something. This is a beginning. I hope you will
realise that jet planes discharging carbon dioxide into the
stratosphere is most probably the main culprit behind "global"
warming. Now we should we should compare how much one ton of CO2
emitted by jet planes into the stratoshpere is equivalent to how many
tons of CO2 produced on Earth, that is not absorbed by greenery. That
will be a proper basis for blame assignment. So CO2 generation in
areas sans greenery will be far more punished than CO2 generation
within greenery.
> > If it is conclusively shown that the ice on Antarctica is not melting,
>
> Sadly it's already been conclusively shown that it is melting. Today's
> news...
>
> http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/antarctic-ice-melting-10-faster-than-tho...
>
> Quote: ..."new research shows the Antarctic's eastern ice sheet, long
> thought to be unaffected by climate change, is melting 10% faster than it
> can produce ice".
>
> > the best solution is to use hydrogen as fuel
>
> The problem is that Hydrogen isn't an energy source. It's better to think of
> hydrogen as a battery that needs another source of energy to charge.
> Currently we can't make lots of hydrogen without using another fuel that
> does release C02.
Hydrogen as a fuel is an energy source all right. Hydrogen can be
created from electrolysis and many other processes - chemical (put
steam over heated coal to make coal gas which contain Hydrogen) and
even from biological methods. A lot of work has been done on this.
Sunlight and seawater will create hydrogen - the sunlight will be
converted to electricity with solar cells, and seawater will be
electolysed with that electricity to make hydrogen. Brackish water
may be used, and other alternative energy sources may be used to
create the electricity.
The main problem has been that Hydrogen is difficult to store.
However, the Hydrogen Transmission Network (my invention) will
overcome this. A flow process will replace the store and carry
process, the normal one for fuels. My partner Ilya Shambat and I are
now creating a website for this. We have already talked to
politicians here, and bureaucrats. They have seemed enthusiastic.
Now we need to make ourselves clear to the public, how this invention
will solve both energy and water issues for the planet for all time -
make the world a green, happy, lively place.
> Personally I'd like to see research on fusion stepped up. We need an Apollo
> or Manhattan like approach to get it done. I'd also like to see more public
> money going into research into Photovoltaic cells, particularly roll to roll
> manufacturing processes that allow them to be manufactured continuously
> rather than in batches.
Research on fusion will be useless, for it has already been done for
60 years without success. Mainly this is so because the theory for
fusion (e=mcc stuff) is totally wrong. Much better to go in for the
Hydrogen Transmission Network, mate. And after that, the Internal
Force Engine... but that is another story!
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 5:13 pm
From: "Arindam Banerjee"
"Arindam Banerjee" <adda1234@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:b1c5c16a-5f3f-4bd5-a30a-6367f96096e7@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 25, 4:40 am, "Cwatters"
<colin.wattersNOS...@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> "Arindam Banerjee" <adda1...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> news:sVEOm.57037$ze1.19932@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > It may well be that the Himalayan glaciers are melting more than usual,
> but
>
> > the point is that they are not melting as fast as those in Europe or
> > USA,
>
> I agree but it seems the prime minister of Nepal doesn't ...
>
> September 1 2009
>
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/08c1b2f0-96f8-11de-9c24-00144feabdc0.html
>
> "Speaking at a two-day Himalayan climate change conference in Kathmandu,
> Madhav Kumar, Nepal's prime minister, said: "The Himalayan glaciers are
> retreating faster than any other glaciers in the world as the temperature
> is
> increasing."
Are we going to believe in politicians now? This matter is far too
important to be decided by the statement of some politician. I am not
saying that he is wrong, though. Glaciers may be retreating in Nepal
and Alaska, but we have to see the true causes, and one way is to
measure the rates of retreat and match them with the quantity of
carbon dioxide in the local region. We have Indian scientists on the
field making a point, which is contrary to the point made by Western
scientists who evidently want the facts to suit their pet theories.
To give another example - the Western scientists have been saying that
Bangladesh will be inundated by rising sea-waters. So the land will
shrink. But the Bangladeshi scientists have not seen anything of
this, over the last ten years. If anything, the land area has
increased as a result of continuous silting. The point is that if
thirdworld scientists blindly believe whatever they hear from the
firstworld scientists, they will lead their nations into dire
trouble.
To quote Sherlock Holmes: Facts first, theories afterwards. To doctor
facts (ignore some, twist some) to suit pet theories, is the greatest
villainy a scientist can do. No engineer can follow such corrupt
scientists. The pity is that the world is not run by engineers, even
though engineers have made the modern world.
> > I also note that you have overlooked my main point.
>
> I don't agree with your assertion that it's all down to C02 produced by
> aircraft.
Let us see what points you make.
>That is quickly dispersed around the world by the jet stream and
> weather.
The point is density/concentration of pollution. How much of it (the
carbon dioxide) produced in a region stays in or near the region. Of
course the Carbon Dioxide will get dispersed, but it will not get
dispersed immediately. There will be varying concentrations, and the
concentration will be most at and around the places where the
pollution was created the most. Thus since aeroplanes fly less over
the Himalayas, there will be less pollution over the Himalayas - what
their is will be from the diffusion from the areas where the pollution
was the highest. Always, at the place where the source of pollution
is, the pollution density will be the highest.
There are plenty of examples of global transport...Sand from the
> Sahara desert turns up thousands of miles away including in England,
> radiation from Chernobyl travelled to China and Canada. Sulphur from
> English
> coal fired power stations caused acid rain across Europe etc.
Fair enough. Traces will be found. Surely you are not trying to make
the point that the concentration of sand (measured by mass of Sahara
sand per unit area) from the Sahara found in England is anywhere near
the density of Sahara sound found in the Sahara.
AB: I meant Sahara SAND, not Sahara sound! Sorry for this error.
I have no doubt that
a fair amount of carbon dioxide produced by jet planes flying over
Alaska finds its way over the Himalayas, and thus causes glacier
retreat. Now we compare the rates, on a factual basis, for glacier
retreats in the Himalayas and in Alaska. Here there is a problem.
The rates in Alaska are beyond controversy, while those in the
Himalayas certainly are controversial.
> But you do have a point about pollution. Pollution makes snow and ice
> dirty
> which causes it to absorb more sunlight and reflect less heat back into
> space.
At least we agree on something. This is a beginning. I hope you will
realise that jet planes discharging carbon dioxide into the
stratosphere is most probably the main culprit behind "global"
warming. Now we should we should compare how much one ton of CO2
emitted by jet planes into the stratoshpere is equivalent to how many
tons of CO2 produced on Earth, that is not absorbed by greenery. That
will be a proper basis for blame assignment. So CO2 generation in
areas sans greenery will be far more punished than CO2 generation
within greenery.
> > If it is conclusively shown that the ice on Antarctica is not melting,
>
> Sadly it's already been conclusively shown that it is melting. Today's
> news...
>
> http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/antarctic-ice-melting-10-faster-than-tho...
>
> Quote: ..."new research shows the Antarctic's eastern ice sheet, long
> thought to be unaffected by climate change, is melting 10% faster than it
> can produce ice".
>
> > the best solution is to use hydrogen as fuel
>
> The problem is that Hydrogen isn't an energy source. It's better to think
> of
> hydrogen as a battery that needs another source of energy to charge.
> Currently we can't make lots of hydrogen without using another fuel that
> does release C02.
Hydrogen as a fuel is an energy source all right. Hydrogen can be
created from electrolysis and many other processes - chemical (put
steam over heated coal to make coal gas which contain Hydrogen) and
even from biological methods. A lot of work has been done on this.
Sunlight and seawater will create hydrogen - the sunlight will be
converted to electricity with solar cells, and seawater will be
electolysed with that electricity to make hydrogen. Brackish water
may be used, and other alternative energy sources may be used to
create the electricity.
The main problem has been that Hydrogen is difficult to store.
However, the Hydrogen Transmission Network (my invention) will
overcome this. A flow process will replace the store and carry
process, the normal one for fuels. My partner Ilya Shambat and I are
now creating a website for this. We have already talked to
politicians here, and bureaucrats. They have seemed enthusiastic.
Now we need to make ourselves clear to the public, how this invention
will solve both energy and water issues for the planet for all time -
make the world a green, happy, lively place.
> Personally I'd like to see research on fusion stepped up. We need an
> Apollo
> or Manhattan like approach to get it done. I'd also like to see more
> public
> money going into research into Photovoltaic cells, particularly roll to
> roll
> manufacturing processes that allow them to be manufactured continuously
> rather than in batches.
Research on fusion will be useless, for it has already been done for
60 years without success. Mainly this is so because the theory for
fusion (e=mcc stuff) is totally wrong. Much better to go in for the
Hydrogen Transmission Network, mate. And after that, the Internal
Force Engine... but that is another story!
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Okay, on to the Ardennes
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/f472bf8a540c8434?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 3:33 pm
From: Stratum101
On Nov 24, 4:20 pm, Stratum101 <j.coll...@cross-comp.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 3:47 pm, Stratum101 <j.coll...@cross-comp.com> wrote:
>
> > Interesting narrative (click on Contents link at top of page)
> > in Google Books images of the Life Magazine issue
> > mentioned in subject line. Life was then calling this
> > "the Battle of France," that is, the Allied advance across
> > western France after June 6.
>
> > Go here:http://tiny.cc/mHVQX
>
> I don't propose to write it, but as long as we're tearing
> across France at breakneck speed, this is a good place
> to voice a thought that has long occurred to me.
>
> A new Great World War II Novel (presumably all the
> great ones have already been written) would be
> something with a title like, "The Trial of Pierre Laval".
My proposed title may require work.
_The Trial of Pierre Laval: Defining Treason,
Collaboration and Patriotism in
World War II France_ exists. In fact, it was
published a few weeks ago. The author is
J. Kenneth Brody. A blurb calls it "a
stunning work".
(Laval was tried in several days in October,
1946, and executed a few days later
in what to Americans who hadn't
experienced four years of occupation
looked like a kangaroo court. Even his
bitterest enemy Charles de Gaulle was
ambivalent about the execution.
Despite what I have heard fellow Americans say
["post-war French mobs were quick to even
old scores"], it is a fact that the Fourth Republic
executed only a few collaborateurs, and spared
the life of Philippe Petain because of his
advanced age and because he had been a
hero of 1914-18.)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Books That Founded D&D
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/8ba57c69243a3499?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 3:36 pm
From: "Marko Amnell"
"Sean O'Hara" <seanohara@gmail.com> wrote in message
7n2sshF3k4iu5U1@mid.individual.net...
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Marko Amnell declared:
>>
>> That is absolutely not true. You are completely ignoring
>> movement in combat. In fact, there are many examples from
>> military history in which a single warrior defeated a large
>> number of opponents. Here is a list of some from the book
>> _Essential Militaria_ by Nicholas Hobbes (pp. 103-105).
>> I will exclude the cases in which the lone warrior stood
>> on a bridge, thus forcing all of his opponents to attack
>> from the same direction.
>>
>
> <snip examples>
>
> Two of these are clearly cases of a warrior killing a series of opponents
> instead of fighting off a group.
You are referring to William Marshal and
Peter Francisco. In fact, at least according to
one account, Marshal fought off over thirteen
attackers alone who had surrounded him:
"The next day, young Marshal could not be held
back in the battle. The new knight spurred his destrier
forward, desperate to be the first into the enemy
packed streets of Drincourt. The chronicles tell
us that he fought like a lion, and felled many of
the foe. His fierce attack so impressed his noble
cousin that it brought him to say, 'He is the only
knight in battle this day.'
"Before long, William´s drive left him surrounded
by a large band of footmen. The Histoire de
Guillaume le Mareschal tells us, 'More than
thirteen of them formed a band to knock him off
his horse, but he held on by the breast piece of
its harness.' With sword and broken lance he
fought his way clear. But his horse was less
fortunate - dying from its wounds shortly thereafter."
http://threeriver.org/marshal/marshal_1.shtml
It is true that Marshal probably defeated the
forty or so knights at the battle in succession.
However, it is entirely possible that some of
the fights involved Marshal fighting more than
one opponent at a time, as he was pushing
deep into the enemy army.
* * *
It is true that Peter Francisco probably killed
the eleven men at the capture of Stone Point
in succession. But Francisco also later defeated
eleven soldiers alone in an incident that came
to be called "Francisco's Fight." Here is
wikipedia's description of it:
"Francisco's Fight is the name commonly given to a
skirmish between Tarleton's Raiders and Peter Francisco
during the American Revolutionary War in July 1781.
"The common version is that Francisco had been badly
wounded in the leg by a bayonet during the Battle of
Guilford Courthouse and had been ordered home to
recuperate by his commanding officer. While passing
through the settlement of Ward's Tavern in present-day
Nottoway County, Virginia, Francisco encountered a
band of 11 Raiders at Benjamin Ward's tavern. They
promptly took him into custody. One of the 11, commonly
said to be the paymaster, was told to take charge of the
prisoner of war, while the others went into the tavern
for a few drinks.
"Much of what happened next is known only from
Francisco's later account, which he wrote in an
attempt to receive a congressional pension for his
services. According to this account, the paymaster
told Francisco to hand over his valuables; Francisco
responded that he had none. The paymaster, in response,
pointed to Francisco's silver shoe buckles, and ordered
him to take them off. Francisco responded that he would
not, but that the man could have them if he could take
them. The dragoon then bent over to remove the buckles,
in the process tucking his sword under one arm. Francisco
promptly pulled the sword away and cleft the man's
head in two with it; when the dragoon tried to pull out
his pistol, Francisco cut off his hand, and the man died
not too long after.
"While this was happening, the other Raiders had
exited the tavern upon hearing the commotion. Francisco
promptly turned his attention to them, killing a second
and (probably) mortally wounding a third. Of the
remaining eight, he wounded six. The others fled to
their regiment, which was visible in the distance. As
Tarleton approached, Francisco decided to try and
keep a larger battle from breaking out. He ran to a
nearby grove of trees and shouted into them, calling
a nonexistent Continental regiment to come and fight
Tarleton. The British colonel did not want a fight,
and turned his men away."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco%27s_Fight
== 2 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 5:48 pm
From: nebusj-@-rpi-.edu (Joseph Nebus)
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> writes:
>David DeLaney wrote:
>> Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote:
>>> "Marko Amnell" <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>>>> If Lieber were right, there would be no point in training
>>>> to fight with a sword.
>>>
>>> Suppose I only need to take out two opponents.
>>
>> But ... what if one of them was armed with a banana?
>What is it about British comedians and bananas? Pratchett must
>mention the Librarian eating one (or looking for one, or being bribed
>with one, or ...) at least ten times a book..
Might it be a lingering Austerity Britain thing? I recall some
vague talk from a book about bananas (well, about United Fruit, but it
comes to much the same thing) mentioning what a big deal an early cargo
of bananas in postwar Britain was, as the promise of bananas for every
wife and child represented the good life which was to come in the new
welfare state.
(The author mentioned being disappointed when he learned that
Fyffes was just a branch of the United Fruit empire of America, rather
than a home-grown British brand such as Ford or Woolworth's.)
--
Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
== 3 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 6:22 pm
From: Kurt Busiek
On 2009-11-24 17:48:48 -0800, nebusj-@-rpi-.edu (Joseph Nebus) said:
> "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> David DeLaney wrote:
>>> Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote:
>>>> "Marko Amnell" <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>>>>> If Lieber were right, there would be no point in training
>>>>> to fight with a sword.
>>>>
>>>> Suppose I only need to take out two opponents.
>>>
>>> But ... what if one of them was armed with a banana?
>
>> What is it about British comedians and bananas? Pratchett must
>> mention the Librarian eating one (or looking for one, or being bribed
>> with one, or ...) at least ten times a book..
>
> Might it be a lingering Austerity Britain thing? I recall some
> vague talk from a book about bananas (well, about United Fruit, but it
> comes to much the same thing) mentioning what a big deal an early cargo
> of bananas in postwar Britain was, as the promise of bananas for every
> wife and child represented the good life which was to come in the new
> welfare state.
>
> (The author mentioned being disappointed when he learned that
> Fyffes was just a branch of the United Fruit empire of America, rather
> than a home-grown British brand such as Ford or Woolworth's.)
My vote: "Bananas" sounds funnier in a British accent than in an
American accent.
"Pop-Tarts" sounds funnier in American, but only just.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
== 4 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 6:01 pm
From: djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
In article <nebusj.1259113596@vcmr-86.server.rpi.edu>,
Joseph Nebus <nebusj-@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>David DeLaney wrote:
>>> Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote:
>>>> "Marko Amnell" <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>>>>> If Lieber were right, there would be no point in training
>>>>> to fight with a sword.
>>>>
>>>> Suppose I only need to take out two opponents.
>>>
>>> But ... what if one of them was armed with a banana?
>
>>What is it about British comedians and bananas? Pratchett must
>>mention the Librarian eating one (or looking for one, or being bribed
>>with one, or ...) at least ten times a book..
>
> Might it be a lingering Austerity Britain thing? I recall some
>vague talk from a book about bananas (well, about United Fruit, but it
>comes to much the same thing) mentioning what a big deal an early cargo
>of bananas in postwar Britain was, as the promise of bananas for every
>wife and child represented the good life which was to come in the new
>welfare state.
Probably connected with the fact that during World War II, when
all kinds of shipping was being sunk and Britain went on short
rations, the few bananas that did get in were available only for
young children. How old is Pratchett? Is he old enough to have
been a child in the 1940s, or even in the early 1950s when
rationing was still on?
There's a line in Tolkien's "On Fairy-Stories" saying that a
story about the Archbishop of Canterbury slipping on a banana
peel would not necessarily be taken as mythical. Unless it was
contained in a tale about how he was warned in a dream that he
would fall if he wore gaiters on a Friday. Or unless it was
supposed to have happened during the war.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at hotmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress.
Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
== 5 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 8:51 pm
From: Walter Bushell
In article <mgjmg5lhhr3di6m3k3ffo0n14ojne33cah@4ax.com>,
David Johnston <david@block.net> wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2009 19:18:01 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> <tednolan>) wrote:
>
> >In article <heelo9$f94$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >Mike Schilling <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>David Johnston wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:42:42 +0200, "Marko Amnell"
> >>> <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> >>>> A master swordsman can
> >>>> defeat many less skilled opponents in combat. To quote
> >>>> Miyamoto Musashi in _The Book of Five Rings_:
> >>>>
> >>>> "If he attains the virtue of the long sword, one man can beat
> >>>> ten men.
> >>>
> >>> If he's wearing armour and the ten men are untrained peasants.
> >>
> >>None of whom think of sneaking up behind the swordsman and braining
> >>him with a rock.
> >>
> >
> >IIRC, that was one of the parts of _Guns Germs & Steel_ that seemed least
> >convincing -- that steel made a handful of Spaniards *so* overwhelming that
> >the conquest of Latin America was inevitable.
>
> Don't forget the guns and germs. And since the Spaniards did conquer
> again and again the technological edge probably was good for something
> or other.
And the natives didn't have metal weapons of any kind, not copper nor
tin nor bronze. Stone weapons and leather armor. The Spanish probably
had better tactics.
Still it does seem strange.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
== 6 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 8:52 pm
From: Walter Bushell
In article <MPG.257597e3fe5621aa98981c@news.kolumbus.fi>,
Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <mgjmg5lhhr3di6m3k3ffo0n14ojne33cah@4ax.com>, David Johnston
> (david@block.net) says...
> > On 23 Nov 2009 19:18:01 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> > <tednolan>) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <heelo9$f94$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >Mike Schilling <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>David Johnston wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:42:42 +0200, "Marko Amnell"
> > >>> <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> > >>>> A master swordsman can
> > >>>> defeat many less skilled opponents in combat. To quote
> > >>>> Miyamoto Musashi in _The Book of Five Rings_:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> "If he attains the virtue of the long sword, one man can beat
> > >>>> ten men.
> > >>>
> > >>> If he's wearing armour and the ten men are untrained peasants.
> > >>
> > >>None of whom think of sneaking up behind the swordsman and braining
> > >>him with a rock.
> > >>
> > >
> > >IIRC, that was one of the parts of _Guns Germs & Steel_ that seemed least
> > >convincing -- that steel made a handful of Spaniards *so* overwhelming that
> > >the conquest of Latin America was inevitable.
> >
> > Don't forget the guns and germs. And since the Spaniards did conquer
> > again and again the technological edge probably was good for something
> > or other.
>
> Alexander counquered again and again without much of a technological
> edge. He probably would have whupped Aztec ass, too. Competently led,
> trained and organised force is a lot bigger advantage than any
> technological edge.
>
> Having your population devasteted by disease doesn't help, of course.
Alexander was not facing the kind of odds the Spanish were.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
== 7 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 9:08 pm
From: "Mike Schilling"
Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
\> Probably connected with the fact that during World War II, when
> all kinds of shipping was being sunk and Britain went on short
> rations, the few bananas that did get in were available only for
> young children. How old is Pratchett? Is he old enough to have
> been a child in the 1940s, or even in the early 1950s when
> rationing was still on?
Born in '48, so perhaps just. The Pythons are 5-10 years older.
== 8 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 9:12 pm
From: "John F. Eldredge"
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:51:24 -0500, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <mgjmg5lhhr3di6m3k3ffo0n14ojne33cah@4ax.com>,
> David Johnston <david@block.net> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Nov 2009 19:18:01 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <heelo9$f94$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Mike Schilling
>> ><mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>David Johnston wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:42:42 +0200, "Marko Amnell"
>> >>> <marko.amnell@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
>> >>>> A master swordsman can
>> >>>> defeat many less skilled opponents in combat. To quote Miyamoto
>> >>>> Musashi in _The Book of Five Rings_:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "If he attains the virtue of the long sword, one man can beat ten
>> >>>> men.
>> >>>
>> >>> If he's wearing armour and the ten men are untrained peasants.
>> >>
>> >>None of whom think of sneaking up behind the swordsman and braining
>> >>him with a rock.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >IIRC, that was one of the parts of _Guns Germs & Steel_ that seemed
>> >least convincing -- that steel made a handful of Spaniards *so*
>> >overwhelming that the conquest of Latin America was inevitable.
>>
>> Don't forget the guns and germs. And since the Spaniards did conquer
>> again and again the technological edge probably was good for something
>> or other.
>
> And the natives didn't have metal weapons of any kind, not copper nor
> tin nor bronze. Stone weapons and leather armor. The Spanish probably
> had better tactic
>
> Still it does seem strange.
From what I have read, the Aztecs and Mayans had developed copper tools,
but had not yet discovered bronze. Copper won't hold much of an edge, so
the edged weapons mostly used flint or obsidian bound to a wooden shaft.
--
John F. Eldredge -- john@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
== 9 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 10:39 pm
From: "rexgatch@yahoo.co.uk"
On Nov 25, 12:08 am, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> \> Probably connected with the fact that during World War II, when
>
> > all kinds of shipping was being sunk and Britain went on short
> > rations, the few bananas that did get in were available only for
> > young children. How old is Pratchett? Is he old enough to have
> > been a child in the 1940s, or even in the early 1950s when
> > rationing was still on?
>
> Born in '48, so perhaps just. The Pythons are 5-10 years older.
Food rationing in the UK ended (according to online sources) in 1954.
Check out just what those rations were, I heard a story (presumably an
urban myth) that Churchill once scarfed down a weeks rations and
called it a decent breakfast.
Regards
Rex
== 10 of 10 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 11:03 pm
From: Juho Julkunen
In article <proto-3DC584.23524324112009@news.panix.com>, Walter Bushell
(proto@panix.com) says...
> In article <MPG.257597e3fe5621aa98981c@news.kolumbus.fi>,
> Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Alexander counquered again and again without much of a technological
> > edge. He probably would have whupped Aztec ass, too.
>
> Alexander was not facing the kind of odds the Spanish were.
Neither were the Spanish, really.
That is to say, they did make quite a lot native allies.
--
Juho Julkunen
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 10 Reasons Why YOU Should Join Us
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/t/fa6a99fdd0b9e13f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Nov 24 2009 11:02 pm
From: ZULKIFLI
10 Reasons Why YOU Should Join Us
The Most Proven Leisure Internet Business.
Business that earns you more money every day.
Thanks to the power of the Internet.
Ground floor opportunity backed by a highly successful.
1. Free Registration
2. Start Earning As Soon As You Join
3. Weekly Unlimited Income
4. Making Money Around The Clock
5. Without Leaving Your House
6. No Selling
7. No Need To See People For Sponsoring
8. Supported by Most Advance Automatic System
9. Take Care of One Success Line Only
10. Small Capital, Big Profit
For More Information,
Click Here
Or
Copy & Paste This Link: http://www.vemmabuilder.com/699398605
(Only available in USA, Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany,
Indonesia, Ireland, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines,
Singapore, Slovenia, Taiwan and United Kingdom)
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.arts.books"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.arts.books+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Has laoreet percipitur ad. Vide interesset in mei, no his legimus verterem. Et nostrum imperdiet appellantur usu, mnesarchum referrentur id vim.
0 comments:
Post a Comment