From: look@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (ken loo)
Newsgroups: soc.penpals
Subject: Re: A wittle survey...jus' a wittle wone...
Keywords: Honesty, Lying
Date: 16 Aug 92 22:46:31 GMT
Distribution: soc.penpals
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <92Aug16.195142.20793@acs.ucalgary.ca> panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio) writes:
>In article <56985@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> look@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (ken loo) writes:
>To this jaundiced, subjective NetEye, it means there's something
>to be ashamed about if you don't speak English according to some
>hypothetical standard of "correct" pronunciation - maybe the way

so we agree on something.  I read that post also, was kind of
strange to say that He speaks with no accent.  But, personal experience
tells me that it is kind of nice to be able to have creative 
usage of a language fluently, but that does not say anything
about an accent.

>(Recalling article in Scientific American about the human visual
>system)
     
I have never read the article.

>Apparently a pretty dense wall of blood vessels (the one that
>shows up as redeye in all those party pictures) lies between our
>retinas and our lenses, so that in fact we do not "see" as much
>as our brain constructs a picture of the world based on light
>values falling on those rods and cones that do get photons on
>them, i.e. everything we "see" is a partially constructed reality
>
>And I suppose everyone constructs ("sees") differently, hmm....
>

not to the pt. of total disagreement.  If so, then science
would not possibily exit.  The experimental parts anyways

>See, I didn't even have to bring in quantum mechanics and the
>capriciousness of observation....hehehehehehehehehehehehe   :)

no, you didnt. 

>
>Besides, the "facts" that I "see" depend on the quality of my
>seeing, which means under the influence of alcohol I "see" twice
>as much of "reality" as I normally "see" and everyone looks great
>
I was refering to as in an experimentalists point of view, a law(fact)
is true only when it could be reproducted by others in noncordinated
experiments.


>And when I'm not wearing my glasses I can hardly see anything!

facts does not nec. have to be seen.  If you believe in
the sixth sense, it does not even have to be a physical sensation.
but that contradicts what I said about experiments in the above.

>See above. I would collect information, but it's easier to make
>it up....that's the way my brain works, anyway  ;)
>
ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,.....
a true engineer(or engineering student), if the answer isn
not correct, make up new datas to make it correct.  
multiply by a safty facter of about one million, that way
the bridge will surly not fall down. 

how about some Physicists, Mathemticians, and Engineer jokes?
>
>I suppose my being a mechanical engineer precludes my using
>intuition to figure out "Will she, or won't she?" so that, like
>Kevin Brown over in soc.singles, I will restrict myself to the
>"observable facts"? Not on your life, or anyone else's!   :)
>
>Mechanical engineer = able to relate to what? "Facts"? Sure! But
>I'd really rather "relate" to some of my models... ;) ;) ;) ;)
>

a true scientist uses both intuitions and facts(who ever said
that engineers are true scientists!).  
>
>KL>And dont bring up quantum mechanics.      
>
>I didn't.
>
no, you didnt.

>KL>to anyone else in this universe.  I was mearly stating
>KL>what I thought about myself, which is totally subjective.
>KL>If you see otherwise of my saying of myself, it is your
>KL>observation.  And since you know nothing of me other than
>KL>what I have written,(which was not too much)  you do not
>KL>have enough facts about me to conclude anything.  
>
>Oh, really? (Shakespearean actor persona)

yeh really.  My young(old) Jedi, where is your engineering traing?
what ever happened to all the restless nites in lab where
you repeated an experiment over and over again.  Then to take
the average and calculate the "ERROR"!
so you think you really know much about me?

>
>Methinks you take yourself and your views far too seriously.

oh, really?  As I have said, you know nothing about me.
I only take what I believe is morally right and wrong very seriously.
If I had presented myself otherwise, it was because I am on the defensive
I do not like to be called cynical when there is no basis for it.
None which I see anyways.

Which makes me a poor Christian, and a semi-ok scientist hope to be.

>
>(Victor switches to NetDude persona)
>
>Relax, friend. Chill out. Go wi' the flow. Like, just BE!
>
>(Victor switches to Southern California ValleyGirlSpeak)
>
>Furshirr!  (translation: For sure!)
>
>Back to our regularly scheduled programming......
>

what ever.

>VP>>I prefer Kahlil Gibran: "The world is a great mirror. It reflects
>VP>>back to you what you yourself are."
>
>KL>he must have been a quantum physicist.
>
>Well, I dunno if you were trying to inject a bit o' levity here

most of the time, I am rather levitated.  as of now, I will
make an exception.  

>(as I am), but actually, he was a Lebanese poet and philosopher,
>and if my hunch is right, you've probably read some of his work.

cannt say that I have.

>
>Ken, all kidding aside, I'm just being mischievous here, and I'm

you are doing a good job.

>not interested in starting any philosophical debates or flamewars
>or anything like that, either.
>
>I just like to have FUN. And I don't have to switch NetGenders to
>do it, either. Hope you don't think this is at YOUR expense.

my expense at what?  

ok, all seriousness aside,

>
>Or should I call you Kendra?
 
it is now Kenilyn(as in Tamilyn.  not you Tamilyn, but the
other Tamilyn)
>
>(Sorry, I couldn't resist, I'm laughing so hard I'm crying here!)
>
why are you crying?
Ken
.