HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Rights for Rocks! (battle of the dogmas)
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:03:39 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct14.231139.7026@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>But not among establishment economists.  They are very disconnected
>from the real world.  did you see how an American won the Nobel Prize
>for economics by showing that people include economic considerations
>when making a decision?

That was not the sole basis for awarding him the prize.  Furthermore,
demonstrating that *IS* important.  It means that at least *SOME* parts of
economic theory *ARE* related to reality.

>>As opposed to conventional economics? That schisms exist does not
>>preclude dogma, nor does the fact the opposition is dogmatic
>>preclude the ecocentrics being dogmatic.
>
>True, but it does preclude it from being ossified, as you claimed.
>Some proponents certainly are dogmatic, but not all, so the
>philosophy is not dogma.

No, it does not preclude ossification.  It's quite possible to have two
opposing dogmatic camps in a field, both of them quite thoroughly ossified.

>Maybe we can discuss acupuncture and homeopathy after we are done
>with ecocentrism!

Take it to sci.skeptic, but be prepared to present evidence for your claims.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Rights for Rocks! (battle of the dogmas)
Date: 16 Oct 1992 18:04:45 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct16.150939.22099@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
=>That was not the sole basis for awarding him the prize.  Furthermore,
=>demonstrating that *IS* important.  It means that at least *SOME* parts of
=>economic theory *ARE* related to reality.
=
=I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the newspaper simplified the reason
=for the award.  As I said, it is a shrewd probe into the depths of
=the obvious.  If a field of study considers a discovery that is
=obvious to most people a significant achievement, then I think it is
=pretty disconnected.  That this effort is needed is because 
=economics is so disconnected.

Dean, isn't it "obvious" that an object in motion tends to come to rest? 
Wasn't the observation that that wasn't, in fact, true unless there was
friction considered to be one of the greatest steps forward in physics?  Isn't
it "obvious" that you can't have a wave without a medium to propagate the wave? 
Isn't the Michelson-Morley experiment considered one of the milestones of
physics?  Why the hell do you demand that economics simply ASSUME that what is
"obvious" is true?  If physicists had adopted the attitude you seem to
advocate, we'd still be using Aristotle as the primary physics text. 
Demonstrating that one of the fundamental assumptions of economics does, in
fact, have a real basis in reality is not the trivial achievement you make it
out to be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:45:26 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester

In article <1992Oct12.191732.24793@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:

>Perhaps you could tell us exactly which industrial processes would be
>so effected. I don't see:
>
>	- textile production
>	- steel manufacture
>	- timber processing
...
>to name but [3], as affected by avoidance of heavy metals.


Steel manufacture is most certainly affected by avoidance of heavy
metals.  Steel is made from ores and from coal containing heavy
metals.  Coal, for example, is often rich in uranium, to name just
one.  Steel often contains potentially toxic alloying elements,
including nickel and chromium.  Steel scrap is also often contaminated
with other metals, including tin, cadmium, lead, zinc and copper, and
the power used to drive electric arc furnaces often comes from
coal-fired powerplants.

Timber processing includes the treatment of timber with toxic heavy
metal compounds, such as copper chromium arsenate, to resist decay.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
From: gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Sustainable lifestyles
Distribution: world
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 07:05:28 GMT
Organization: STAFF STRATEGIES - Anthropologists & Training Agents


In article <JMC.92Oct14194636@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:

 > If there were a demand, I'll bet some aborigine promoters would be
 > glad to conduct seminars about how to live a true aborigine life.  How
 > about 50 people each paying $800 to some certified aborigines for a
 > weekend seminar on how to find grubs and how to kill kangaroos with a
 > boomerang?

The going rate to the end of the last financial year was actually
$575.00 for *three* days.

How many in your party? I would be pleased to give you a quote, and
perhaps offer a discount for the very real pleasure I would gain from
seeing you actually start your formal education.

On your return to the U.S., why we might actually begin to see a
glimmer of intelligence to your comments.

--
Gil Hardwick                                      gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au
Independent Consulting Ethnologist                            3:690/660.6
PERTH, Western Australia                                 (+61 9) 399 2401
   * * Sustainable Community Development & Environmental Education * *
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Request for Help:  Rain Forests
From: f_gautjw@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:11:32 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

My daughter, who is interested in environmental matters, would like to
get some information on the involvement of US companies in the environ-
mental decline of the Brazilian rain forest.  Can anyone help or suggest
an approach to getting this information.

Many thanks.

Joe Gaut
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 16 Oct 1992 17:48:46 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <JMC.92Oct15210453@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
>Unfortunately, the short handled hoe works better than the long handled
>hoe in getting the weeding done quickly.

But the long-handled hoe allows more intensive cultivation.  If arable land is
the limiting resource (rather than human labor) the long-handled hoe wins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 05:13:07 GMT

In article <-1366948899snx@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au> gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
>
>In article <JMC.92Oct10113638@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>
> > in disagreement with someone who said:
> >  
> >      The more labor intensive day-to-day survival is, the lower
> >      the standard of living is.
> >  
> > Both within countries and between countries, the lower the standard
> > of living the more fighting there is.
>
Violence among the poor becomes common when there are unrealized expectations
of wealth, which often implies great disparities of wealth.  Societies with
low _material_ standards of living, but with sustainable lifestyles are
often very satisfied and have little violence.  I have traveled extensively
in the hills of Nepal where material standards of living are extremely low.
Violence is simply not an acceptable method for solving personal disputes.
The people lead a hard and happy life.  I was traveling alone, eating with
the people, sleeping next to their chicken coops and was not insulated at all.
I would feel much safer walking through any city at night there than in any
city in the US.  I also met Nepalis who had lived in the US and went back
"because nobody smiles in American cities."  I would suggest that their
definition of a "high standard of living" would be very different than yours.
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 10 Oct 92 11:36:38

Jason Jannot says:


     I disagree I feel life might be that much richer if I had to
     rely on myself alone to survive.  I also think that if it
     were as such people would only have themselves to blame for
     their strife/happiness and as a result human conflicts could
     be kept to a minimum.

in disagreement with someone who said:

     The more labor intensive day-to-day survival is, the lower
     the standard of living is.

Both within countries and between countries, the lower the standard
of living the more fighting there is.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: --UCS Offers New Energy Policies
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 16:11:47 GMT

In article <JMC.92Oct10134024@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>I'm dubious about wind energy becoming important.  Almost all U.S.
>wind energy comes from two mountain passes in Calfiornia.  What is
>the average wind site going to be like?
>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
>

The greatest potential for wind is not in CA, but in the northern plains.
Other areas have a potential as high or higher than California.  Potential
is defined as relatively consistent winds.  IT seems that even the current
transmission technologies could move wind power from the Dakota's to the
population centers of the uppermidest.
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
From: zzang@stat.ufl.edu (zzang)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Environment in the House
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:45:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: eng.1992Oct15.204534.5403
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Florida
Originator: zzang@manta

Hello,
I have recently read the book "Why your house may endanger your health".
I think this is very good book.
when people talk about environment, they mean the outdoor environment.
considering the portion of times we spend indoor, the environment
within the house has much more direct impact on the health of people
than that of outdoor. I wonder why we haven't seen much articles on
this issue.
-- 
Zhuo Zang[~{j0WA~}]
Department of Statistics
University of Florida            Email: zzang@stat.ufl.edu
Newsgroups: sci.environment
From: beast@netcom.com (J. Kintscher)
Subject: Re: Lot of questions about hemp
Organization: Belle & Philippe, Pty. Ltd.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:59:27 GMT

In article <-1366830271snx@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au> gil@Gilsys.DIALix.oz.au (Gil Hardwick) writes:
>Few varieties apart from *cannabis sativa* appear to produce sufficient
>quantities of cannabis resin to make them attractive to dope-heads,
>and it remains a mystery given the tremendous historical value of the
>crop why the species itself was declared illegal. Perhaps more of the
>type of hysterical superstition fueled by ignorance we see here in
>"sci".environment . . .

I remember hearing something about Du Pont doing a lot of the lobbying to
make hemp illeagle.  The implication was that he wanted to cut down on the
competition for the synthetic fibers his labs were cooking up. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Kintscher	 | "Now, my suspicion is that the universe is not only
beast@netcom.com     	 |  queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can
			 |  suppose. . . . I suspect that there are more things
"No matter where you go, |  in heaven and earth than are dreamed of,  in any
 there you are."	 |  philosophy."
			 |				J. B. S.  Haldane
	Buckaroo Bonzai	 |				Possible Worlds
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:46:36

Oh good, "stone age mentality".  Please tell us, Mr. Consulting Anthropologist,
the anthropological definition of "stone age mentality".  Or do we have
to pay?

The option of living an arbitrarily primitive life exists in the U.S.
and even more so in Australia, which is much less populated.  Or does
providing the option somehow require coercing the rest of us.

If there were a demand, I'll bet some aborigine promoters would be
glad to conduct seminars about how to live a true aborigine life.  How
about 50 people each paying $800 to some certified aborigines for a
weekend seminar on how to find grubs and how to kill kangaroos with a
boomerang?
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Part 2, RADIOACTIVE MEAT, MILK & PRODUCE: Supermarkets Selling Leukemia
Date: 8 Oct 1992 17:06:45 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: na
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct8.161347.24421@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo) writes:
=Kerr-McGee is also the only "farmer" who spreads fertilizer with
=leased tank trucks whose doors read "Chemical Waste Disposal Division."

That may be true.  However, please bear in mind that "organic" farmers ought to
spread their fertilizer in trucks labelled "Active Biological Waste Disposal."

=As to the validity of his tests, he says:
=    the fertilizer "has been tested since 1973. If it hasn't been 
=    adequately tested, then I don't know how to adequately test it."
=
= [JD: Tucker is conveying the impression that the fertilizer is being
=      adequately tested. But he is using carefully chosen words to state,  
=      with semantical strictness, just the opposite -- that he is NOT   
=      sure that he knows how to adequately test the fertilizer.  
=      This semantically honest statement technically clears his 
=      implied meaning of any dishonest inferences.]

If JD's comment above isn't utter bullshit, I don't know what is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:59:11 GMT
Followup-To: talk.environment
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester

In article <1992Oct8.161055.29408@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
>In article <JMC.92Oct7225619@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:

  >> In the long run we'll either have to chew up rock to make more or
  >> do without.

  > If chewing up rock was all that we needed to do to replace topsoil, I
  > imagine we'd have been doing it some time ago.

Not necessarily; if there is enough topsoil around it is more economical
to consume it until the marginal benefit of making more (and saving
what is there) would exceed the marginal cost.

  > Alas, decent topsoil is more involved than that.

Of course, but I haven't seen it demonstrated that, when we need to,
the cost of improving the soil will be prohibitive.

I suggested some time ago that soil erosion can be partially addressed
by recovering sediment from rivers for recycling back onto farmland.
This was poopooed, but I understand this has been standard practice
for years in China (where people are fed on 1/8 the land per capita
that the US uses).  You trap the sediment in catchments near the
fields to reduce transportation costs.  You also recycle organic
matter onto the fields, which is not done today in the US to nearly
the same extent.

  >>The semi-voluntary poverty being advocated by ignoring cost wouldn't
  >>last long.  When a decent live begins to require oppressing other
  >>people, systems of oppression will develop.

  >This is bullshit. The principal savings from using plastic come from
  >labor reductions (things can be stamp-pressed or poured into molds,
  >instead of being carved or assembled). None of these savings over
  >previous production methods went into "decent lives" for the people
  >that used to do this work - it went into better lives for the people
  >who wanted to reduce their payroll.

*This* is bullshit.  The beneficiaries are *consumers*, who
pay less for products of a given functionality.  Producers in
a commodity market like plastics have razor-thin profit margins.
Most of the savings get passed right through to you and me.  This
is true of most manufacturing enterprises.

The reason you can afford a car, and clothes, and appliances, and etc.
etc. is because of savings from labor reductions, many involving new
materials like plastics and increased use of energy inputs.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 16 Oct 92 03:19:39 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <JMC.92Oct15172216@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>FIn article <54833@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>
>   In article <JMC.92Oct14200937@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>   >Some back of the envelope calculations suggested that the economics
>   >is tolerable for short distances in areas with expensive farmland
>   >where soil is the only difference between poor land and good land.
>
>   Perhaps you are missing out on a profitable venture. Please let's
>   all see these calculations. 
>
>   yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
>
>I'll supply them when I get ready.  In the mean time it would be good
>for you to do a calculation for *once*.

Anything in particular you'd like me to figure? I'm impressed by your
belief that simple calculations involving figures you have invented
can reveal much about reality.

>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.


-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.environment
Subject: Re: Sustainable lifestyles
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:48:24 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <JMC.92Oct16114015@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
>The elimination of the short handled hoe in California because of its
>bad effects on workers' backs is the result of demands by the labor
>movement.  (I'm not sure it's all gone).  If it were less efficient
>than the long handled hoe, which is much older in agriculture, it
>would never have been introduced.

I'll dispute your claim that the long-handled hoe is "much older in
agriculture."  Perhaps in some agricultural traditions, it is, but not in all.
For example, the Gwembe Tonga on the Zambezi river used the short-handled hoe
exclusively until some of the members of the tribe travelled far enough (in the
1960's I think) to encounter the long-handled hoe.  The latter quickly
displaced the short-handled hoe, largely because it allowed them to plant their
crops much more densely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.environment