Accounting Talk » Accounting » Vitamin D Deficiency

Vitamin D Deficiency

Question:

tetany[tet'unE] Pronunciation Key tetany , condition of mineral imbalance in the body that results in severe muscle spasms. Tetany occurs when the concentration of calcium ions (Ca++) in extracellular fluids such as plasma falls below normal. The nervous system becomes increasingly excitable, and nerves discharge spontaneously, sending impulses to skeletal muscles and causing spasmodic contractions. Mild tetany is characterized by tingling in the fingers, toes, and lips; acute tetany, consisting of severe muscular contractions, tremors, and cramps, can result in death. Abnormally low extracellular calcium ion concentration can result from failure of the parathyroid glands to release parathyroid hormone, the substance responsible for the regulation of calcium concentration in the body; a deficiency in vitamin D, which facilitates calcium ion absorption from the gastrointestinal tract; or alkalosis, an excessively alkaline state of body fluids resulting from persistent vomiting, rapid breathing, or excess activity of the hormone aldosterone. Most forms of tetany can be treated with calcium, vitamin D, and a controlled diet. Muscle tetany is also caused by the pathogenic bacterium Clostridium tetani in the disease tetanus. tetanus Tete The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia

Response:

VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY EMERGES AS NEW EPIDEMIC; NIH CONFERENCE CALLS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACHES TO ADDRESS GROWING PROBLEM Medical experts are talking about a new health epidemic — one that most thought was eliminated decades ago. It’s a lack of vitamin D. The surprising deficiency is increasing the risk of osteoporosis and accounting for the re-emergence of rickets in children. People make their own when sunlight hits the skin, vitamin D is also found in fortified milk. With people spending more time indoors and the frequent swapping of milk for soda, Americans aren’t getting the vitamin D they need. http://healthy.net/scr/news.asp?Id=774 www.healthy.net is my favorite alternative site-

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting
Tags: Accounting

Accounting Talk » Accountants » Carty: Security measures are "nuts"

Carty: Security measures are "nuts"

Question:

iv) Security at different airports needs to be regularly assessed by an *independent* body. v) The design of airports in general, and security systems in particular, needs to be reassessed by human factors specialists who can pinpoint designs

Agree. Coupled with this is that hired security experts should be continually challenging and circumventing the security measures at airports, followed up with policy changes to ensure that security evolves and improves over time — instead of remaining static and predictable to future terrorists. Carty can complain about his employees being screened carefully, but there is a lot of evidence that the terrorists obtained airport and airline employee disguise uniforms.

Response:

Then again the "Office of Homeland Security" doesn’t have any authority to provide security either.

As I recall, the impetus for forming "Homeland Security" was to solve the problem of coordinating so many separate organisations and making it more natural for all the various intelligence organisations to share information. It may have been simpler to just give the CIA a mandate that includes domestic surveillance/intelligence since you’d have one organisation capable of putting intl info together with domestic info and provide sufficient evidence of a plot. Consider that the FBI agent’s warning of an attack on WTC. By itself, it was just another warning amongst so many. But if instead of the FBI, it had been the CIA that had found out about this threath, it may have put 2 and 2 together and combined the information obtained domestically with that obtained internationally about Ossama and friends and been able to provide the white house with a clear and credible threath that would have stood out from the list of regular threaths they get every day. If Homeland security is able to share information from FBI, NSA, CIA and whetebver else exists, then perhaps the CIA will be able to provide better insight on foreign operatives who plan to do something in the USA. (doubtful that FBI would gain access to CIA information).

Response:

Then again the "Office of Homeland Security" doesn’t have any authority to provide security either. All it can do is advise Shrub on what he should tell others to do. There may be a few security advisors in the military who could have done the job. Oh wait — I forgot — the job isn’t security it’s to control the political fallout and that needs a trained politician. Frank Matthews – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why do we need an Office of Homeland Security, isn’t that why we have the military? While I don’t believe we needed another government agency, the US military is severely restricted in what it can do within the US. For example, US troups have no authority to detain or arrest US citizens within the US. "But wait!" you say. "Why did they put National Guard troops in the airports?" The National Guard troops were not federally activated, thus were under the control of the state governors. In most cases, since there was no local state of emergency, these troops had no law & order authority either. Can you say "show?"

Response:

I think most of the security added since 9/11 is cosmetic. After going through the metal detector at FLL, and being wanded, I was then stopped within 10-feet by some kid National Guardsman carrying an auto rifle slung over his shoulder, and asked for double ID to get to the WN terminal stand. ??? Told the kid as he looked at my ID’s that he wasn’t doing me any good in the middle of the airport security wise, only place he would do any good would be sitting outside the cockpit at 39,000 feet with that gun, which if the "hot coffee" millions lawsuit follows true to form for politicians and airport directors, I doubt those kids were trusted with any bullets for those guns. Wouldn’t want one of the weekend warriors blowing off a magazine of automatic fire in the full terminal. Purely cosmetic. Check your local newspaper, look at the wage scales for airline employees, particularly baggage handlers, ramp supervisors, ticket agents, security, etc., it is very, very low. So the profession isn’t attracting anybody much higher than private security guards make. Most retail store detectives, trained to observe behavior and mannerism, to catch shoplifters, make more money than those baggage scanners. Now we are going to make all those Wackenhut, et al people federal employees, and this will improve security of our airports? See – IRS, INS, U.S. Postal Service. Will be the biggest boondoggle federal union we ever created, and isn’t going to change much. They need to start over – recruit – background investigate, and train this staff, and then pay them a high wage for maintaining the system. How many bags can you look at before you nod off? Change the scanner people every 15-minutes. Although I like seeing the pilots and crew required to go through the metal detector – what are they doing up on the passenger terminal anyways? They have employee entrances. Check em there. If they have to come through a terminal, they should be under security escort – what is to prevent someone from dressing like pilots and attendants, and jumping a jetway? Again, purely cosmetic, the public likes to see actual people like them getting on and off the planes. A soothing idea. I just bet the airlines hate that PA announcement about seat cushons being used for flotation devices. Right. The 300-foot parking rule – goes back, not to Oklahoma City as much as the Marine barracks attack in Beirut. Government building’s have big concrete barriers in front to prevent that type of traffic from getting close now. Airport design is the problem here. You could park, should park, away from the terminal, and ride the tram in, not the bus or taxi to the front door. Nothing really prevent’s the crazies, or zealots, as the bombings in Israel prove, from coming to the front door. Sort of off-the-wall, we could insist on taxi and bus drivers when directed to take people to airports, to show them a ticket – the old Columbian Medellen drug cartel had every cab driver in the city working for it. If the person didn’t have a ticket, or was "meeting" someone, could be let off in a holding area and checked by security there in a walk through of a metal detector before entering terminal spaces. No control on people coming in to stand at the terminal to buy a ticket. Let them walk through a detector outside too. Called channeling and control of the perimeter. You should have a valid reason for getting into that terminal. This is how they control the Super Bowl access – egress. Design again. The jetway, my pet peeve. Want to take over any airliner – grab the pilot the minute you step aboard, the cockpit door is almost always open on departure and arrival for the "bob" syndrome. Head bob, thanks for darn door, and lock it, and bar it while at the gate. Once inside, they control the aircraft, unfortunately we as passengers are expendable, little to protect us but the flight attendants, and ourselves. Pilot controls the craft, and shouldn’t be opening that door for any reason while passengers are aboard. What about a second sliding track door between the cockpit, and the first row of seats? Expensive? How many flights have you been on where you know the front galley is abandoned as the crew serves the passengers? Lets lock that area down. Again, channeling and perimeter control, another hurdle, can be done even easier in a small space. Just announcing regulations prohibit lines at the forward rest rooms right outside that cockpit are not going to protect it. Why let the crazies get to the last door without challenge? Lets put in a barrier to stop em before they get to that door. The Dentist Rule. My own dentist commented to me on this that he can put me out in seconds with several types of drugs. If we had a small galley space barrier door on a sliding track to protect the cockpit, than had some type of disguised chemical spray device, like mace, that the pilots could release the instant an attack was observed on their area (why don’t they have a simple camcorder looking out through a pinhole in the roof of the jet so the pilots can see what is going on in the galley, then you could knock out potential attackers right there. Would knock out a bunch of passengers too, but better than a terrorist at the cockpit with explosives or knives. Guns in the cockpit? Negative. Bullets = decompression. Stun guns for the pilots and the flight attendants, why the heck not? Unless we as passengers protect ourselves on the plane, the flight attendants, who are essentially trained to smile and avoid confrontation, and difuse conflict, are our only protection in the air. They also have the right to protect themselves too, not just us. Essentially, the American airline industry has to solicit advice, along with the Federal government, the FAA, from the experienced traveling public. Because we demand our soothing comfort, and want no hassles free flying, all the ideas are being dictated to us, and most of them are cosmetic. A change in thinking is needed on behalf of the traveling public. What will we stand for – how serious a threat do we perceive is out there? Yes, the government should be more vigilant, but most of their errors wouldn’t have been discovered under normal regulations, even the visa extension to the dead Islamic extremists that were mailed to their last know addresses in Florida, long after 9/11, although embarrassing, didn’t really violate any rules. Can public opinion be changed? Of course, if it couldn’t – even in the slow to change airline industry – airlines like Peoples Express – Air Tran – Comair – Jet Blue – South West - Virgin – Laker – would never have been created, and many of those lines changed public opinion about flying, and what we would stand for quickly, and permanently. Now, the flying public needs to change their thinking about safety, and the airline industry on a whole, and dictate those changes to the airlines, and the government, not the other way around. That is done with the pocketbook. While the majors took the short term government bailout money after 9/11, used it to shore up their financial bottom line and disguise their poor management, and than went and layed off thousands of workers, what shoud have happened was Delta, American, U.S. Air, United, should have doubled, tripled, flights, cut fares drastically, and used the Wal Mart theory, grab market share, and they wouldn’t be in trouble today. How about a government loan program for some of those experienced airline people to use in starting up competing airlines, and gate purchases? Why bail out the majors, how about a little lift to some entrepreneurs, and maybe we get a lot of talented, serious, trained airline people back to work, with a success, like South West? Or, use them in airline security. The flying public will stand for a lot, but eventually, all these lines, searches, random checks (the one I actually agree with), serious looks at the counters, the no joke rules, etc., will be forgotten. I predict that by 9/11/02, most of those traveling by air will be sick of the security measures, and demand our old soothing ways back again. We can’t.

Response:

Carty can complain about his employees being screened carefully, but there is a lot of evidence that the terrorists obtained airport and airline employee disguise uniforms.

Show me the "evidence"! There is NONE.

Response:

But the solution is apparently to create some more alphabet soup and add the TSA and the OHS.

They talk about "downsizing" government, but create more bureaucracy. Why do we need an Office of Homeland Security, isn’t that why we have the military? We spend hundreds of billions of $$$$ on defense, shouldn’t protecting the homeland be their job?

Response:

Why do we need an Office of Homeland Security, isn’t that why we have the military?

While I don’t believe we needed another government agency, the US military is severely restricted in what it can do within the US. For example, US troups have no authority to detain or arrest US citizens within the US. "But wait!" you say. "Why did they put National Guard troops in the airports?" The National Guard troops were not federally activated, thus were under the control of the state governors. In most cases, since there was no local state of emergency, these troops had no law & order authority either. Can you say "show?"

Response:

[snip] Creating another over-priced ineffective federal bureaucracy to address the issue is, ‘doing something’. But remember this will be established by the same group of individuals who think nothing of you spending a few weekends of your time in order to complete a tax return. In the end, airport security will be no better, altough it will be much more costly.

Well, to be honest, what really burns me up is that no one seems to notice that 9/11 didn’t happen because the body searchers weren’t doing their job. They did do their job. No one is accusing them of letting folks on the planes they shouldn’t have that day. So I don’t see how having the gubberment do it is suppose to "fix" anything. The failure that day was of the INS/CIA/FBI. But the solution is apparently to create some more alphabet soup and add the TSA and the OHS. Holy heck batman, these guys woulda been great at rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Response:

Very good point. However, I did appreciate Carty’s comment about the strip search of Aunt Polly in Iowa. But he should have said, let’s profile now and settle the lawsuits later. I really do not know i this was done on purpose or just the result of politicians doing what they do best: act to make it look like their are taking actions even though their actions are ridiculous.

The politicos have to ‘look’ like they are doing something. Although most of us should recognize that the elected mindless serving us in Congress have no more expertise on airport security than the rest of us. And probably less. Creating another over-priced ineffective federal bureaucracy to address the issue is, ‘doing something’. But remember this will be established by the same group of individuals who think nothing of you spending a few weekends of your time in order to complete a tax return. In the end, airport security will be no better, altough it will be much more costly.

Response:

iii) Travellers need to be better informed about security, e.g. by television advertisements.

The one positive aspect about today’s random and illogical security is that it makes it very hard for terrorists to plan something since they don’t really know what they can expect from day to day at an airport. One day, it is shoes that are forbidden, the other it is the nailclippers. I really do not know i this was done on purpose or just the result of politicians doing what they do best: act to make it look like their are taking actions even though their actions are ridiculous.

Response:

[snip] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The 300′ rule _is_ a waste of space since the damage would be best served by dragging a bag full of explosives DIRECTLY into the terminal (luggage) and "poof" – up it goes in a ball of flame. Alternately, a suicide attack with a mini-van full of HE and pull up to either departure or arrival depending on which is more crowded for maximum body count. I suppose that in bombs as in some aspects of life "size matters", but as has been shown in Israel, small amounts of HE (that’s HIGH EXPLOSIVES) do sufficient damage to cause it to get noticed. That’s the type of action they should be worried about – the loonies are going to snuff themselves at any rate. It’s better for "publicity" if they get into a crowd. What better crowd than a static crowd in line at a terminal? That may have been what the arab was going to do for 2001 at LAX (they never DID say what his intentions were – except to explode something – or method was – except that I doubt that he was planning to meet alla – meaning ("not to be there when the balloon went up") sorry, I’m just a realist

The 300 foot limit is an attempt to make Ryder Truck bombs fairly useless. Yes, a suicide bomber can still walk in, but as has been shown, you kill vastly fewer with body bombs than with a good truck load of fuel oil and fertilizer. Mind you, I think there is very limited added security here because you can still drive the truck right up to the front door, you just can’t park it there for long. How long is the fuze and even if you found it you’d have limited time to react. We’re fooling around trying to restrict dangerous things when the problem is dangerous people.

Response:

But he’s right this time—tho his statements should have been made months ago. At least maybe now, with his statement, maybe enough others in positions of influence will be able to apply enough pressure to get rid of some of the useless "security" practices, such as the ones he mentions & a # of others.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Carty is just plain scary sometimes.

Response:

[As much as Carty has been criticised here, he couldn't be more right on target with respect to the pseudo security measures in place right now.]

<snip Problem with most of the new security laws is that they’re cosmetic. To really see better security, a few things need to happen: i) A bunch of *real* security experts need to sit down, decide where the potential risks lie and come up with uniform ways of avoiding them. And by real security experts, I don’t mean a bunch of politicians. ii) Security personnel need to be well-trained, using a uniform and thoroughly designed course, they need to have a career path (and salary) that makes it worthwhile to stay in the job and promotes high performance, and they need to undergo regular, scheduled training throughout their career. iii) Travellers need to be better informed about security, e.g. by television advertisements. iv) Security at different airports needs to be regularly assessed by an *independent* body. v) The design of airports in general, and security systems in particular, needs to be reassessed by human factors specialists who can pinpoint designs that make human error far more probable. This last point is one of my beefs about airport design in the USA – while it is understandable that older airports might not be very well layed out, even new airports in the USA are pathetic when it comes to human factors/ergonomic principles. They are rife with confusing structures and designs that make consistent and uniform security practically impossible. Much of the above really comes down to good design principles and thorough advance planning. The thing is, such an approach, although entailing extra costs initially, would probably lead to increased efficiency and reduced costs in the long run. Tom

Response:

you miss the point that Reid was APPROVED for the earlier flight that he missed (they had no complaints after they quizzed him) and was allowed to board the next day’s flight. The failure was in that security didn’t (still doesn’t IMHO) have a way to detect explosives secreted on the individual except for the "hunt and peck" method. (I just re-read your response and I guess I’m agreeing with what you said) The 300′ rule _is_ a waste of space since the damage would be best served by dragging a bag full of explosives DIRECTLY into the terminal (luggage) and "poof" – up it goes in a ball of flame. Alternately, a suicide attack with a mini-van full of HE and pull up to either departure or arrival depending on which is more crowded for maximum body count. I suppose that in bombs as in some aspects of life "size matters", but as has been shown in Israel, small amounts of HE (that’s HIGH EXPLOSIVES) do sufficient damage to cause it to get noticed. That’s the type of action they should be worried about – the loonies are going to snuff themselves at any rate. It’s better for "publicity" if they get into a crowd. What better crowd than a static crowd in line at a terminal? That may have been what the arab was going to do for 2001 at LAX (they never DID say what his intentions were – except to explode something – or method was – except that I doubt that he was planning to meet alla – meaning ("not to be there when the balloon went up") sorry, I’m just a realist

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [As much as Carty has been criticised here, he couldn't be more right on target with respect to the pseudo security measures in place right now.] By TERRY MAXON and TERRI LANGFORD / The Dallas Morning News The head of American Airlines Inc. criticized airport security as too expensive and "nuts," saying Monday that the federal government needs to rethink the steps it has taken or proposed to thwart terrorism on airplanes. "There are some things that I think we shouldn’t be doing," said Donald J. Carty, American’s chairman and chief executive. " I don’t think great security comes from strip-searching Aunt Molly in Iowa." He cited the intense scrutiny that uniformed flight crews must undergo, such as an American pilot whose purse was thoroughly checked by a security screener. "She asked the screener what he was looking for. He replied that he was looking for anything that she might be able to use to break into the cockpit on her flight." Of course, the pilot didn’t need a weapon to get into the cockpit. "I think it’s safe to say that searching flight crews for nail files is nuts," he said. He also said that passenger screening at gates "is both nuts and needlessly expensive," with passengers screened sufficiently at security checkpoints. When airline schedules are disrupted, he said, "imposing positive bag matches on connecting flights will cause absolute paralysis in airports. The intention is good, but the effect can be disastrous." A better idea is to develop effective bag screening, he said. Mr. Carty was interrupted [by applause] after a number of comments, including his criticism of a federal ban on auto parking within 300 feet of airport terminals. "It should go without saying, most nuts of all, of course, is the 300-foot parking rule," Mr. Carty said. He is sorta in a strange place to be complaining. He’s whining that their closing the barn door incorrectly after the horse is gone from the barn. It’s not that he’s wrong, it’s just kinda strange to see him talking about this now as oppose to say 2 years ago. The 300 foot one is slightly more useful than most of the junk. But an awful lot of the junk isn’t gonna protect anyone. This was aptly proven when Mr. Reid was actually detected and detained yet ultimately got on the aircraft with his explosives laden shoes. They are searching for needles in hay stacks without the slightest idea what neither needles nor hay look like.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [As much as Carty has been criticised here, he couldn't be more right on target with respect to the pseudo security measures in place right now.] By TERRY MAXON and TERRI LANGFORD / The Dallas Morning News The head of American Airlines Inc. criticized airport security as too expensive and "nuts," saying Monday that the federal government needs to rethink the steps it has taken or proposed to thwart terrorism on airplanes. "There are some things that I think we shouldn’t be doing," said Donald J. Carty, American’s chairman and chief executive. " I don’t think great security comes from strip-searching Aunt Molly in Iowa." He cited the intense scrutiny that uniformed flight crews must undergo, such as an American pilot whose purse was thoroughly checked by a security screener. "She asked the screener what he was looking for. He replied that he was looking for anything that she might be able to use to break into the cockpit on her flight." Of course, the pilot didn’t need a weapon to get into the cockpit. "I think it’s safe to say that searching flight crews for nail files is nuts," he said. He also said that passenger screening at gates "is both nuts and needlessly expensive," with passengers screened sufficiently at security checkpoints. When airline schedules are disrupted, he said, "imposing positive bag matches on connecting flights will cause absolute paralysis in airports. The intention is good, but the effect can be disastrous." A better idea is to develop effective bag screening, he said. Mr. Carty was interrupted [by applause] after a number of comments, including his criticism of a federal ban on auto parking within 300 feet of airport terminals. "It should go without saying, most nuts of all, of course, is the 300-foot parking rule," Mr. Carty said.

He is sorta in a strange place to be complaining. He’s whining that their closing the barn door incorrectly after the horse is gone from the barn. It’s not that he’s wrong, it’s just kinda strange to see him talking about this now as oppose to say 2 years ago. The 300 foot one is slightly more useful than most of the junk. But an awful lot of the junk isn’t gonna protect anyone. This was aptly proven when Mr. Reid was actually detected and detained yet ultimately got on the aircraft with his explosives laden shoes. They are searching for needles in hay stacks without the slightest idea what neither needles nor hay look like.

Response:

What’s nuts is that during the 90s, AA, UA et al gave the Clinton Democrats over $900,000 so that Gore’s so-called airline security bill would not unduly cause the airlines to lose any money while ‘ensuring the security’ of its pax. Well, now that AA and UA have lost 4 planes, several hundred of their own pax are dead, as well as 2500 others on the ground, and the nation is suffering horendous trauma, I just hope, Mr. Carty, that the pay off was worth it to you.

Carty is just plain scary sometimes. "Nothing is sacred" Don Carty, May 20, 2002

Response:

Well, now that AA and UA have lost 4 planes, several hundred of their own pax are dead, as well as 2500 others on the ground, and the nation is suffering horendous trauma, I just hope, Mr. Carty, that the pay off was worth it to you.

In all fairness, the murderers did not break any FAA rules when they boarded the planes and what they were carrying with them was perfectly legal. Where Carty can be blamed most is that AA is the one airline whose accountants dictate that not carrying the weight of paint saves the airline $x per year, and I suspect that those same accountants would have balked at the concept of an extra bar of metal to re-enforce the cockpit doors. Post 9/11, those accountants were told to shut up and find a way to make the airline survive because not implementing those measures would cost way too much in bad PR for the airline. USA airlines that operate internationally should have been able to go to the FAA/government and give them examples of how security works at foreign airports and tell them that this is how they want it to be in the USA. They should have been to point to architectural changes that would be needed at certain USA airport to make security work better. I did not see the airlines rushing to the government and making real suggestions on procedures and architectural changes. They just sat back and watched the political circus trying to decide whether the employees should be paid with government paychecks, or with contractor paychecks funded by XXX. How come Carty is only speaking out now ?

Response:

[As much as Carty has been criticised here, he couldn't be more right on target with respect to the pseudo security measures in place right now.] By TERRY MAXON and TERRI LANGFORD / The Dallas Morning News The head of American Airlines Inc. criticized airport security as too expensive and "nuts," saying Monday that the federal government needs to rethink the steps it has taken or proposed to thwart terrorism on airplanes. "There are some things that I think we shouldn’t be doing," said Donald J. Carty, American’s chairman and chief executive. " I don’t think great security comes from strip-searching Aunt Molly in Iowa." He cited the intense scrutiny that uniformed flight crews must undergo, such as an American pilot whose purse was thoroughly checked by a security screener. "She asked the screener what he was looking for. He replied that he was looking for anything that she might be able to use to break into the cockpit on her flight." Of course, the pilot didn’t need a weapon to get into the cockpit. "I think it’s safe to say that searching flight crews for nail files is nuts," he said. He also said that passenger screening at gates "is both nuts and needlessly expensive," with passengers screened sufficiently at security checkpoints. When airline schedules are disrupted, he said, "imposing positive bag matches on connecting flights will cause absolute paralysis in airports. The intention is good, but the effect can be disastrous." A better idea is to develop effective bag screening, he said. Mr. Carty was interrupted [by applause] after a number of comments, including his criticism of a federal ban on auto parking within 300 feet of airport terminals. "It should go without saying, most nuts of all, of course, is the 300-foot parking rule," Mr. Carty said.

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accountants
Tags: Accountants

Accounting Talk » Accounting » Virgin- Perth International Terminal

Virgin- Perth International Terminal

Question:

When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. Actually, in real property (legal) terms, commercial leases aren’t too far away from ownership in some ways for the duration of the lease. Until the administrator decides to hand up the lease, the terminals are very much his. Unfortunately for the admin, such leverage as they may amount to (short of an actual asset) shrinks with time. He hasn’t exactly a Melbourne Cup field of prospective "buyers" for the lease, and he is under pressure to realise SOME of the Chansett assets pronto. I suspect VB are sitting back waiting for the fie sale ….

Interesting comments in Business Sunday’s ‘Extraordinary Items’ that provided a convincing line that The Dick may well be rather strapped for cash and thats why the surprisingly generous conditions Patrick Corp got for its 50% and that since The Dick would have to pay for the terminal if they bought it, that thats unlikely to happen. Cant find it on a superficial look on the BS web site.

Response:

Anyone know why Virgin Blue park at the international gate, bay 55 at Perth. Why not Ansett’s old Terminal area?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone know why Virgin Blue park at the international gate, bay 55 at Perth. Why not Ansett’s old Terminal area?

Response:

Ansett terminals are still under the control of the admisistrator. The ansett terminals are assets and will eventually be sold off virgin will prob move in there then, depends on who buys them how much they want to charge and weather there is a need to move. P. Anyone know why Virgin Blue park at the international gate, bay 55 at Perth. Why not Ansett’s old Terminal area?

When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. — Trevor Fenn To Email me add an extra green to the address above. "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just" The Star Spangled Banner Francis Scott Key

Response:

Paul Lister said.. PL airlines own the terminals and lease the land they stand on PL much like the way real estate works in canberra. You own the PL house but lease the land from the government (99 year lease). PL when you sell the house, or be it terminals in this case, you also PL sell your rights to the lease. What happens after 99 years? Does the person currently in that house have to give it up?

Nope, they normally get a new lease.

Response:

Actually, in real property (legal) terms, commercial leases aren’t too far away from ownership in some ways for the duration of the lease. Until the administrator decides to hand up the lease, the terminals are very much his. breach

Response:

On 22 Mar 2002, you wrote in aus.aviation: When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. Actually, in real property (legal) terms, commercial leases aren’t too far away from ownership in some ways for the duration of the lease. Until the administrator decides to hand up the lease, the terminals are very much his.

Unfortunately for the admin, such leverage as they may amount to (short of an actual asset) shrinks with time. He hasn’t exactly a Melbourne Cup field of prospective "buyers" for the lease, and he is under pressure to realise SOME of the Chansett assets pronto. I suspect VB are sitting back waiting for the fie sale ….

Response:

133046.news.dfncis.de: On 22 Mar 2002, you wrote in aus.aviation: When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. Actually, in real property (legal) terms, commercial leases aren’t too far away from ownership in some ways for the duration of the lease. Until the administrator decides to hand up the lease, the terminals are very much his. breach

But not to the point they become a saleable asset. — Trevor Fenn To Email me add an extra green to the address above. "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just" The Star Spangled Banner Francis Scott Key

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 133046.news.dfncis.de: On 22 Mar 2002, you wrote in aus.aviation: When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. Actually, in real property (legal) terms, commercial leases aren’t too far away from ownership in some ways for the duration of the lease. Until the administrator decides to hand up the lease, the terminals are very much his. breach But not to the point they become a saleable asset.

Can’t speak for airport terminal leases, but MANY leases are in fact assignable (transferable in lay terms). If the current lessee wishes to be paid a consideration for the residual value of the lease, that qualifies as a sale in my book.

Response:

airlines own the terminals and lease the land they stand on much like the way real estate works in canberra. You own the house but lease the land from the government (99 year lease). when you sell the house, or be it terminals in this case, you also sell your rights to the lease. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ansett terminals are still under the control of the admisistrator. The ansett terminals are assets and will eventually be sold off virgin will prob move in there then, depends on who buys them how much they want to charge and weather there is a need to move. P. Anyone know why Virgin Blue park at the international gate, bay 55 at Perth. Why not Ansett’s old Terminal area? When did the terminals become the property of the airlines? When I left the country they were leased by the airlines from the FAC. I supposed next you’ll tell me the FAC doesn’t exist any more. — Trevor Fenn To Email me add an extra green to the address above. "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just" The Star Spangled Banner Francis Scott Key

Response:

Airports terminals are usually 25 year renewable lease iirc. In accounting terms, you write off your building over 25 years so at the end of the lease it owes you nothing.

Response:

In accounting terms!!! What does that have to do with reality ??? — Outgoing mail is NOT certified Virus Free. However, it’s been scanned by three different packages Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – airlines own the terminals and lease the land they stand on much like the way real estate works in canberra. You own the house but lease the land from the government (99 year lease). when you sell the house, or be it terminals in this case, you also sell your rights to the lease. Airports terminals are usually 25 year renewable lease iirc. In accounting terms, you write off your building over 25 years so at the end of the lease it owes you nothing. In accounting terms!!! What does that have to do with reality ???

OK – in reality you write their buildings off prior to the end of the lease )

Response:

Off topic I know but who cares here? <vbg So when does the lease expire? If I bought today, do I get a new 99 year lease or just the remainder of the thing from 1935 or what ever?? And what happens when I have a nice house on a lease which expires in a year from now?? Interesting…

Response:

What happens when my residential lease expires? Provided that the land is not required by either the Territory or Commonwealth for public purposes, the Government will grant a new residential lease towards the end of the 99 years, to the person holding the old residential lease, without payment (other than an administrative fee). This gives the lessee continuing security of tenure. Prospective buyers of homes and of house and land packages should feel secure in their investment and happy with their land tenure. for more info on canberra land leases go to ….. http://www.palm.act.gov.au/planning_and_development/land_and_leasing/…

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – airlines own the terminals and lease the land they stand on much like the way real estate works in canberra. You own the house but lease the land from the government (99 year lease). when you sell the house, or be it terminals in this case, you also sell your rights to the lease. Off topic I know but who cares here? <vbg So when does the lease expire? If I bought today, do I get a new 99 year lease or just the remainder of the thing from 1935 or what ever?? And what happens when I have a nice house on a lease which expires in a year from now?? Interesting…

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting
Tags: Accounting

Accounting Talk » Accounting Company » I tried to buy a restaurant but the tenant wont let me buy it…. can anybody help or give me some tips?

I tried to buy a restaurant but the tenant wont let me buy it…. can anybody help or give me some tips?

Question:

New Hampshire? If so have you noticed that they have a property tax that will knock your socks off.

Tennessee – Sales tax is well more than double than here. As far as I know, they have no Personal Property Taxes either, leastwise not on cars, but the license plates are quite high. Here is something else interesting, where I currently live, we can choose for example the trash collection service we use and pay them directly. Needless to say, competition keeps the price down, we pay around 35 dollars per quarter for twice a week trash pickup. The adjoining city had the same deal until only a couple of years ago, when the city decided to contract for trash service. Their taxes were increased by 256 dollars to cover this ‘now free’ service. Duh, they are now paying over 60 dollars per quarter for trash pickup and they cannot pick and choose which company they want. Seems most cities have gone this route of price gouging their citizens by charging double or triple the actual cost. In a city of only 25,000 families, that’s an increase in revenues to the city of well over 1/2 million dollars for them to waste on more unnecessary governmental offices. Afterall, they now need to keep track of their collections and expenditures for trash service at costs a hundred times over the costs the trash companies ever incurred to provide the same accounting records. Gary

Response:

I was quite surprised to find out the state my new spouse was born and raised in still does not have an income tax.

New Hampshire? If so have you noticed that they have a property tax that will knock your socks off. "It’s God’s job to sort out what to do with terrorists. It’s our job to deliver them to God. " I’m allergic to spam. Remove "No Spam" from my e-mail address to respond. —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

An I wouldn’t touch it with your pole <g Thanks. I really do need that pole <g.

Ok. Enough is enough. I’m part Polish and I resemble that remark. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia http://www.pat-cpa.com

Response:

Hi Chris The IRS is only concerned with collecting tax from sources of your income, which is only a small portion of the taxes we pay each year. Although I complain the loudest about the myrad of taxes without a source of income to cover them that we do pay, tax on income I have never complained about, the government has to run somehow. I was quite surprised to find out the state my new spouse was born and raised in still does not have an income tax. Personally, I think all taxes not backed by a source of income to pay them should be abolished. Especially taxes like personal property, real estate and all excise taxes. Afterall, you paid tax on the income used to purchase these items, you then payed sales tax using the money that was already once taxed when you purchased them, etc. Taxation without income to pay the tax is stealing. The governments intent is to steal your home, your car, and your land, right out from under you. The Constitution says we shall not pay tax upon tax. Which should have read quite broader, we should not be retaxed on the money we already paid tax on. But we all know the sly little folks in Washington DC understand that to mean we shall not be taxed upon the tax we paid, duh. Was that the intent of our forefathers? What was the Boston Tea Party all about anyhow? Taxation on assets, or actually taxation on inventory, in this case a shipment of tea. TTUL Gary

Response:

The address is hotmail and the posting host Shaw Cable Alberta Canada.

That would indicate that it wouldn’t be Inland Revenue or Internal Revenue that would be interested, but rather the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. The notion that the guy’s posting from Alberta isn’t terribly remarkable. A lot of the "anti-tax nuts" movements in Canada are based in Alberta; it kind of gets the same rap in Canada as Montana does south of the border, being Very Cold in the winter, and, being distant from the national capitals (e.g. – Washington, DC, or Ottawa, Ontario), these places have more than average amounts of this sort of "dissent." CCRA doesn’t have nearly the set of "police powers" that the IRS does, so those that dissent don’t seem to have the fear that seems common in the US… — http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/lisp.html Microsoft: The Scientology of Computing

Response:

An I wouldn’t touch it with your pole <g

Thanks. I really do need that pole <g. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Then suddenly, the tenant said he will not allow me to buy it due to insufficident credit. Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque. Its probably that they think I dont have the ability to pay the rent?

I assume you explained this to the land owner. You ran into a cultural difference. In civilized worlds people don’t really all cheat on their taxes. In fact, the only ones who say, ‘oh, everybody does it’ are actually the only ones that do. The land owner may not like you and may not want you around. I live in a house and i own it. Its worth $400,000, and I have a car worth $20,000, and some bonds, RRSP, etc. no stocks though. I’ve got pretty much asset, over $450,000, so why wouldn’t he let me do it?

Well, you left off a huge liability: everything you own is about to be siezed by the Revenue Agents. Your only hope is to get a good tax attorney and come forward willingly – then MAYBE you can save yourself from being thrown in jail. Perhaps you’ll eventually learn that you have to pay taxes not because someone is MAKING you, but because that’s the deal in your country. You get roads, a ready market, an educated work-force, no invading armies, a stable currency, etc. etc. and in exchange for this infrastructure you (yes, YOU) pay taxes. I know too many good people who really struggle to pay their taxes to have any patience for the people who think the rules don’t apply to them. Wendy Marsden, CPA & EA in MA

Response:

Hi Malni Why not agree with the tenant to place on deposit in his/her name a trust fund that pays them the monthly rent and you the interest for the first year. Or, make a deposit for less than 5 years rent that the interest earned will bring it up to the correct amount by the time the last payment of rent is due. I assume you are in the UK using the word Tenant for the land Owner. TTUL Gary

Response:

The address is hotmail and the posting host Shaw Cable Alberta Canada. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi Malni Why not agree with the tenant to place on deposit in his/her name a trust fund that pays them the monthly rent and you the interest for the first year. Or, make a deposit for less than 5 years rent that the interest earned will bring it up to the correct amount by the time the last payment of rent is due. I assume you are in the UK using the word Tenant for the land Owner. TTUL Gary

Response:

An I wouldn’t touch it with your pole <g

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque. You come in here proclaiming that you’ve committed tax fraud and then ask us how to bolster your credit?? I wouldn’t touch this with a ten foot insulated pole. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com

Response:

It’s called money laundering….I wonder if he can be tracked… wake up FINCEN http://www.treas.gov/fincen/ Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Jim

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well, lets see, my first suggestion would be to quit being a major drain on the damn economy and pay your freakin share of taxes you cheap bastard. Why don’t you go to a mortgage company and take out a loan on your big ole fancy $400,000.00 house. Oh yeah, you can’t cause you don’t have any legal income. Damn the drug pushing, strip dancing, leg breaking business has so many down sides to it. Life sucks, get in line asshole and quit expecing cuts. Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque. Its probably that they think I dont have the ability to pay the rent?

Response:

Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque.

You come in here proclaiming that you’ve committed tax fraud and then ask us how to bolster your credit?? I wouldn’t touch this with a ten foot insulated pole. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Well, lets see, my first suggestion would be to quit being a major drain on the damn economy and pay your freakin share of taxes you cheap bastard. Why don’t you go to a mortgage company and take out a loan on your big ole fancy $400,000.00 house. Oh yeah, you can’t cause you don’t have any legal income. Damn the drug pushing, strip dancing, leg breaking business has so many down sides to it. Life sucks, get in line asshole and quit expecing cuts.

Response:

Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque. Its probably that they think I dont have the ability to pay the rent?

How will you be able to pay your rent after the IRS seizes all of your assets and throws you in jail for fraud and tax evasion? If I was the landlord I wouldn’t want you around either. P.B. Smith, CPA

Response:

Theres this restaurant that is very well established and making alot of money. The restaurant owner ( not the tenant that owns the land ) and I have came to an agreement to buy his business. Everything is pretty much talked and worked out, and I’ve paid $1000 lawyer fee to have the lawyer help me do forms and incorporate the restaurant. Then suddenly, the tenant said he will not allow me to buy it due to insufficident credit. Its probably because my salary for the past few years have been in Cash. Yes pure cash and I haven’t done any of reporting tax because I wasn’t paid in cheque. Its probably that they think I dont have the ability to pay the rent? I live in a house and i own it. Its worth $400,000, and I have a car worth $20,000, and some bonds, RRSP, etc. no stocks though. The restaurant was going to cost me $200,000 and monthly lease cost was only a few thousand. I’ve got pretty much asset, over $450,000, so why wouldn’t he let me do it? Anybody got some tips or strageties on what I can do to get some more trust from the tenant? I haven’t talked to the lawyer again yet, would he be able to help me more? Thanks.

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting Company
Tags: Accounting Company

Accounting Talk » Accounting Services » Plan to encourage defections failing

Plan to encourage defections failing

Question:

| Plan to encourage defections failing Good less of the scumbags will escape justice, for their crimes against humanity

Response:

They scheme, and Allah(SWT) Schemes. And Allah(SWT) Is the Best of schemers. Plan to encourage defections failing

– Usenet Newsgroup Service

Response:

Add together Abu Alwafa’s posts with the so-called ‘peace’ movement in feeds upon, and you have a pretty effective propganda campaign for appeasement to terrorism. If you believe what they’re saying, that is. And if you lose your nerve.

Response:

Plan to encourage defections failing OPERATIVES TRYING TO UNDERMINE THE TALIBAN MEETING ‘STIFF RESISTANCE’ BY MOLLY MOORE AND KAMRAN KHAN Washington Post ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — U.S. and Pakistani intelligence agencies, hobbled by weak contacts and deep distrust, have failed to engineer any significant defections from the military ranks of Afghanistan’s ruling Taliban, according to officials familiar with the efforts, making no headway on a crucial element in Washington’s strategy to topple the radical Islamic militia . Intelligence operatives trying to undermine the Taliban in Afghanistan’s southern and eastern provinces have met "stiff resistance" from even the most ardently anti-Taliban tribal leaders, senior Pakistan intelligence officials say.Washington’s expectations that some key tribal leaders and moderate Taliban military commanders would be willing to turn against the Taliban soon after bombs began to fall on Afghanistan were "horrendously naive," said one Western official monitoring the intelligence agencies’ attempts to foment dissent.A Pakistani journalist with extensive experience inside Afghanistan, Rahimullah Yusufzai, said: "There were expectations that the Taliban would not be able to stay in power, there would be defections, there would be local divisions against them. Nothing of the sort has happened. None of the expectations have been fulfilled. "Long war" The failure to persuade even the most vulnerable leaders to sever their ties with the Taliban, coupled with the Taliban’s resilience in the face of the U.S.-led bombing campaign and the squabbling of Afghan factions competing for power in a post-Taliban government, points increasingly to what one official here forecast as "a long and messy" U.S. intervention in Afghanistan.Pakistani and Western officials blame the failures in sowing dissension within the Taliban on a combination of poor intelligence contacts and powerful religious and cultural bonds between even the most marginal commanders and the Taliban leadership.Part of the problem stems from an abrupt shift last month in the agenda of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence service (ISI), which helped to create and sustain the Taliban since 1994. Under pressure from Washington to purge his government of Taliban sympathizers, Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, revamped the ISI leadership and ordered the agency to switch almost overnight from overt operations supporting the Taliban to covert attempts to overthrow it.As a result, the Taliban and its supporters developed an immediate distrust of their former patrons. ISI operatives who previously had worked openly in Afghanistan had to be pulled out of Taliban territory for their safety, leaving Washington and Islamabad with a human intelligence vacuum in a place where they had hoped to be active, authorities here said."We had human assets all over the country from our two decades of involvement in Afghanistan," said one senior Pakistani intelligence official. "The nature of the current operation is such that our assets have turned into liabilities." "They clearly haven’t had a single major defection since Sept. 12," said Ahmed Rashid, a journalist and author of a bestselling book about the Taliban. "That is a disaster. But how can Islamabad create defections when you have essentially betrayed the Taliban in the flick of an eyelash after seven years of being with them? "U.S. lacks leverage" Current and former Pakistani intelligence officers point out that regardless of issues of credibility and intelligence, they have little leverage to help them move Afghans away from the Taliban. Despite reports that the United States is providing money for bribes and holding out the possibility of leadership roles in a future government, Pakistanis explain that Afghanistan’s ancient and complex web of cultural, religious and families ties often proves impervious to outside offers of material gain.One intelligence official noted that most of the Taliban’s founders and top leaders are from the Pashtun ethnic group, which is Afghanistan’s largest, accounting for about 40 percent of population. "During the Afghan war we used Islam, Pashtun nationalism and Afghan history to drive Afghans against foreign invaders," the official said. "In the present situation, we can’t use any of them to trigger an intra-Pashtun coup against the Taliban."Many ISI officers were less than enthusiastic about orders to approach former friends in the Taliban and ask them to turn against its leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar. Those who were still able to approach tribal leaders or Taliban commanders in southern and eastern Afghanistan made only halfhearted attempts to persuade them to defect, some intelligence officials said.These ISI officials "share Pashtun culture, deep religious upbringing and rich traditions with Afghans," said one Official.

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting Services
Tags: Accounting Services

Accounting Talk » Accounting Cost » A-340

A-340

Question:

[Fullquote cut off] Bwaaaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhawhahhwhahwhahwhawhahwhah hahahwhwhahwhahw! I love this guy! I think that even Sollog is more accurate than Tarver. Bwaawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahw! Bertie

It’s a pity that it’s no use setting a f’up2 de.alt.gruppenkasper (in English: alt.group_clown) Joachim

Response:

A Spoiler is a lift device.

Is it?

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. It is a lift control device, used on MU2 and Helio Courier and Beechjet for roll control. — Jim Macklin ATP, CFI-ASMEI, A&P

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A Spoiler is a lift device. Is it?

Response:

: A Spoiler is a lift device. : : Is it? That’s news to me…the spoilers on the gliders I fly certainly aren’t lift devices… they are lack-of-lift devices (that’s why they are called spoilers, they spoil lift) — Dylan Smith, Houston TX. Flying: http://www.alioth.net/flying Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [Fullquote cut off] Bwaaaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhawhahhwhahwhahwhawhahwhah hahahwhwhahwhahw! I love this guy! I think that even Sollog is more accurate than Tarver. Bwaawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahw! Bertie It’s a pity that it’s no use setting a f’up2 de.alt.gruppenkasper (in English: alt.group_clown)

Absolutely. Bertie

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up.

A negative lift device? Is that like the antimatter engines on the enterprise? Bertie

Response:

You are correct Dylan. "When the pilot activates the spoilers, the plates flip up into the air stream. The flow over the wing is disturbed by the spoiler, the drag of the wing is increased, and the lift is decreased. Spoilers can be used to "dump" lift and make the airplane descend; or they can be used to slow the airplane down as it prepares to land. When the airplane lands on the runway, the pilot usually brings up the spoilers to kill the lift, keep the plane on the ground, and make the brakes work more efficiently. The friction force between the tires and the runway depends on the "normal" force, which is the weight minus the lift. The lower the lift, the better the brakes work. The additional drag of the spoilers also slows the plane down." taken from http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/Other_Groups/K-12/airplane/spoil.html A really neat site with animations. Way to go, NASA. As for flaps, they make for more wing area and thus more lift. See http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/Other_Groups/K-12/airplane/aflap.html Allan — to reply replace elkhound with com in email address

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up.

Oooo…can we then start calling wings antigravity devices? |Rich Ahrens | Homepage: http://www.visi.com/~rma/ | |"In a world full of people only some want to fly – isn’t that crazy?" |

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. Oooo…can we then start calling wings antigravity devices?

Yes, and we could call Tarver an anti-reality device! Bertie

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. It is a lift control device, used on MU2 and Helio Courier and Beechjet for roll control.

Using that broad definition, any mass (because of the effects of gravity) becomes a lift device. Hey guys, here’s something else to add to our resumes!! BW

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. A negative lift device?

Same as an elevator silly bunny. Is that like the antimatter engines on the enterprise?

As far as you are concerned, yes. John —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : A Spoiler is a lift device. : : Is it? That’s news to me…the spoilers on the gliders I fly certainly aren’t lift devices… they are lack-of-lift devices (that’s why they are called spoilers, they spoil lift) — Dylan Smith, Houston TX. You are correct Dylan.

Alan get one almost right. General Dynamics of Canada thanks you for not embarassing them further. John <Information copied from URL snipped —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. A negative lift device? Same as an elevator silly bunny.

Splaps Boy once again demonstrates his complete inability to understand the basic principles… Can someone find the words to explain to him that an elevator (in a conventional empennage, anyway) generates lift? In the opposite direction of the main wing(s), but is is still generating lift. A spoiler, on the other hand, destroys lift. |Rich Ahrens | Homepage: http://www.visi.com/~rma/ | |"In a world full of people only some want to fly – isn’t that crazy?" |

Response:

I don’t think Macklin said any of the things on this page, Macklin

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message Yes, a negative lift device when up. Nope, didn’t say that! A negative lift device? Ditto Same as an elevator silly bunny. Nope, ditto, Is that like the antimatter engines on the enterprise? Nope, ditto, nada, As far as you are concerned, yes. Who, it wasn’t me. John —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Please don’t put my name in the posts with somebody else’s words. NOTHING ON THIS PAGE THAT IS SAYS "

talk. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message Yes, a negative lift device when up. A negative lift device? Same as an elevator silly bunny. Splaps Boy once again demonstrates his complete inability to understand the basic principles… Can someone find the words to explain to him that an elevator (in a conventional empennage, anyway) generates lift? In the opposite direction of the main wing(s), but is is still generating lift. A spoiler, on the other hand, destroys lift. |Rich Ahrens | Homepage: http://www.visi.com/~rma/ | |"In a world full of people only some want to fly – isn’t that crazy?" |

Response:

Alan get one almost right. General Dynamics of Canada thanks you for not embarassing them further. John

Hi Jone, Almost right? Where did I slip up. No mention of splaps perhaps? Allan — to reply replace elkhound with com in email address

Response:

Please don’t put my name in the posts with somebody else’s words. NOTHING ON THIS PAGE THAT IS SAYS " talk.

You’re wrong. My post quoted Bertie quoting you as follows: Yes, a negative lift device when up.

You did in fact write those words. The attribution is exactly correct. As proof, your original post is presented below. Selective quoting of the context of an exchange is normal in Usenet. If you don’t like it, don’t post in newsgroups. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: alt.aviation.bill-mulcahy.screech.babble.drool,alt.aviation.safety,alt.disa sters.aviation,rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.pilotin g Lines: 17 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.94.215.61 Yes, a negative lift device when up. It is a lift control device, used on MU2 and Helio Courier and Beechjet for roll control. — Jim Macklin ATP, CFI-ASMEI, A&P |Rich Ahrens | Homepage: http://www.visi.com/~rma/ | |"In a world full of people only some want to fly – isn’t that crazy?" |

Response:

Yes, a negative lift device when up. A negative lift device? Same as an elevator silly bunny.

Bwaawhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahw! Is that like the antimatter engines on the enterprise? As far as you are concerned, yes.

Oh goody! I can go visit your home planet in a Grob then! Bertie

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : A Spoiler is a lift device. : : Is it? That’s news to me…the spoilers on the gliders I fly certainly aren’t lift devices… they are lack-of-lift devices (that’s why they are called spoilers, they spoil lift) — Dylan Smith, Houston TX. You are correct Dylan. Alan get one almost right. General Dynamics of Canada thanks you for not embarassing them further.

Bwaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwahw! So that’s how you make a living, Splaps boy. I always wondered. Bertie

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please don’t put my name in the posts with somebody else’s words. NOTHING ON THIS PAGE THAT IS SAYS " talk. You’re wrong. My post quoted Bertie quoting you as follows: Yes, a negative lift device when up. You did in fact write those words. The attribution is exactly correct. As proof, your original post is presented below. Selective quoting of the context of an exchange is normal in Usenet. If you don’t like it, don’t post in newsgroups. Newsgroups: alt.aviation.bill-mulcahy.screech.babble.drool,alt.aviation.safety,alt.dis asters.aviation,rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.piloti ng Lines: 17 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.94.215.61 Yes, a negative lift device when up.

Bwaawhahhwahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahw! Bertie

Response:

You are right about that, I just saw all the bunnip crap and it didn’t read like what I said and it was out of context too.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please don’t put my name in the posts with somebody else’s words. NOTHING ON THIS PAGE THAT IS SAYS " bunny talk. You’re wrong. My post quoted Bertie quoting you as follows: Yes, a negative lift device when up. You did in fact write those words. The attribution is exactly correct. As proof, your original post is presented below. Selective quoting of the context of an exchange is normal in Usenet. If you don’t like it, don’t post in newsgroups. Newsgroups:

alt.aviation.bill-mulcahy.screech.babble.drool,alt.aviation.safety,alt.disa s ters.aviation,rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.piloting – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Lines: 17 NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.94.215.61 Yes, a negative lift device when up. It is a lift control device, used on MU2 and Helio Courier and Beechjet for roll control. — Jim Macklin ATP, CFI-ASMEI, A&P |Rich Ahrens | Homepage: http://www.visi.com/~rma/ | |"In a world full of people only some want to fly – isn’t that crazy?" |

Response:

General Dynamics of Canada thanks you for not embarassing them further. Bwaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwahw!

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no! The tarverbot has no connection to Computing Devices Canada (a General Dynamics Company). Please don’t even jest about it. We could loose all our contracts if the tarverbot was thought to work at CDC. So that’s how you make a living, Splaps boy.

The tarverbot is a self-employed masters in engineering and the inventor of the fabled CDI-500 LED driver. Allan — to reply replace elkhound with com in email address

Response:

You are right about that, I just saw all the bunnip crap and it didn’t read like what I said and it was out of context too.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -X-No-Archive: Yes elysium, Boeing can sell 500 to 600 pax versions of the B747-XXX with various seating mixes for about $195,000,000.00 plus 6 billion divided by 150 aircraft and 25 million each for added structure, larger engines and required upgrading, for about $260,000,000.00. amortized. Airbus will need to amortize 20 billion dollars starting from scratch. Using reasonable accounting practices this should cause the AXXX to cost about $200,000,000.00 each for 550 to 650 pax versions plus 20 billion divided by 200 aircraft yeilds a final cost of $300,000,000.00 per plane. Plus about $360,000,000.00 for the upgraded 800 pax version. Airbus Industries is taking a hell of a chance with this project if they go ahead with it because Boeing can and will under cut the hell outta them. If Airbus can win on operating cost per seat mile I’m sure there will be plenty of takers for the A3XX. Their LOI’s look fairly healthy already. I guess they see it as a funding and design advantage they hold over Boeing that they believe is worth materialising to cash in on. As you say though it’s a leap of faith which the customers could scuttle before it pays back. Airbus’ Initial Public Offering (IPO) went EMU22 predicted, sold at EMU19 have a problem. Maybe you should offer them a retrofit Splaps installation, eh Splaps boy? Airbus already calls their Spoilers spoiler flaps, silly bunny. A Spoiler is a lift device. Bwaaaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhawhahhwhahwhahwhawhahwhah hahahwhwhahwhahw! I love this guy! I think that even Sollog is more accurate than Tarver.

Bwaawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahw! Bertie

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – elysium, Boeing can sell 500 to 600 pax versions of the B747-XXX with various seating mixes for about $195,000,000.00 plus 6 billion divided by 150 aircraft and 25 million each for added structure, larger engines and required upgrading, for about $260,000,000.00. amortized. Airbus will need to amortize 20 billion dollars starting from scratch. Using reasonable accounting practices this should cause the AXXX to cost about $200,000,000.00 each for 550 to 650 pax versions plus 20 billion divided by 200 aircraft yeilds a final cost of $300,000,000.00 per plane. Plus about $360,000,000.00 for the upgraded 800 pax version. Airbus Industries is taking a hell of a chance with this project if they go ahead with it because Boeing can and will under cut the hell outta them. If Airbus can win on operating cost per seat mile I’m sure there will be plenty of takers for the A3XX. Their LOI’s look fairly healthy already. I guess they see it as a funding and design advantage they hold over Boeing that they believe is worth materialising to cash in on. As you say though it’s a leap of faith which the customers could scuttle before it pays back. Airbus’ Initial Public Offering (IPO) went EMU22 predicted, sold at EMU19 have a problem. Maybe you should offer them a retrofit Splaps installation, eh Splaps boy? Airbus already calls their Spoilers spoiler flaps, silly bunny. A Spoiler is a lift device.

Bwaaaawhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhawhahhwhahwhahwhawhahwhah hahahwhwhahwhahw! I love this guy! Bertie

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting Cost
Tags: Accounting Cost

Accounting Talk » Accounting » MS and Mercury Amalgams

MS and Mercury Amalgams

Question:

But a question, if someone has no health problems is it wise to remove their fillings rather than leaving things alone?

If it’s working, don’t mess with it. Removal of fillings has only been suggested for people with chronic conditions that do not respond to regular treatment. It’s an option worth considering. Best wishes — John Bain UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html Surround Sound for Television

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does anyone know the complication rate of people replacing their original fillings for the composites?? I know of 2 people off- hand that had significant complications in trying to remove their fillings; neither had any previous health problems prior to the procedure but they were scared that their mercury fillings were a time bomb. But now thousands of dollars later they seem to be in worse shape than before. I don’t think this is a procedure to be taken lightly. frank I agree How are they worse? Did they go to an alternative

dentist who followed the correct protocol? Did he use a rubber dam? Did they have a compatibility test to see what composites to use? Some people need to detox first, depending on the condition. Then they should continue detoxing to rid the body of the mercury. Jan

To be honest I don’t know many of the details of what type of dentist they saw, procedures, etc. But one person has constant dental/jaw pain and the other had problems with cracked teeth/crowns. But a question, if someone has no health problems is it wise to remove their fillings rather than leaving things alone? frank * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

Andrew makes a lot of assumptions. Below is a list of things that were never said. At any rate, the number is far, far too low to be said that the general public has this problem. No one has EVER said the general public has a problem. I have repeatedly stated the fact that amalgam poisoning is not nearly the widespread menace that the Chicken Littles on this NG claim. No one has EVER said that it is widespread. I believe Peter is saying that it is all a placebo response. WRONG! People :don’t run out on a whim, and have the metal removed. : : But you are trying to scare people into just that, Chicken Little.

Here is a post of 5/01/2000: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So where does mercury toxicity fall on the leading causes of death list? I don’t know and don’t care. How many times do we need to go over the same thing? Listen up good, so I won’t need to repeat: Mercury amalgams may never be a problem for most people. However if you have a problem that the docs can’t find. Check the teeth. Mercury poisoning can weaken the immune system.

Andrew replied. Fair enough!

Jan responsed: Now, quit trying to scare everyone into believe that amalgams are a major health crisis.

Sometimes you let your assumptions get the best of you. Now you owe me an Jan Peter means that people shouldn’t have them removed UNLESS there is : a problem.

And that is EXACTLY what I said. This is why I don’t reply to Andrew anymore. Good to see you on again Steve, hope you will stick around. Jan

Response:

I was advised by the amalgam believers that it takes a couple of months for the mercury to get out of the system. Yes. Be sure to find a very good alt. dentist who follows the correct procedure.

Does anyone know the complication rate of people replacing their original fillings for the composites?? I know of 2 people off- hand that had significant complications in trying to remove their fillings; neither had any previous health problems prior to the procedure but they were scared that their mercury fillings were a time bomb. But now thousands of dollars later they seem to be in worse shape than before. I don’t think this is a procedure to be taken lightly. frank * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was advised by the amalgam believers that it takes a couple of months for the mercury to get out of the system. Yes. Be sure to find a very good alt. dentist who follows the correct procedure. Does anyone know the complication rate of people replacing their original fillings for the composites?? I know of 2 people off- hand that had significant complications in trying to remove their fillings; neither had any previous health problems prior to the procedure but they were scared that their mercury fillings were a time bomb. But now thousands of dollars later they seem to be in worse shape than before. I don’t think this is a procedure to be taken lightly. frank

I agree How are they worse? Did they go to an alternative dentist who followed the correct protocol? Did he use a rubber dam? Did they have a compatibility test to see what composites to use? Some people need to detox first, depending on the condition. Then they should continue detoxing to rid the body of the mercury. Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – About my position on mercury and MS, I don’t think mercury causes true MS. However, the effects of mercury poisoning are indistinguishable from MS. I think many people who think that they have MS, actually have mercury poisoning and many, like myself, have both MS and mercury poisoning. I think I have MS, because the blood tests I’ve had done by Dr. Lindner http://www.sky.net/~dporter/MSCFSABX.htm indicate that I have a bacterium that he links, although not yet conclusively, with MS. Thqnks for your post Kip. That is why we need more studies. It seems to affect people in different ways Jeff Clark says the mercury caused his CFS. Others believe it causes fibro. and the list goes on. I do believe it caused my peripheral neuropathy. How you are doing well. Jan

I hope you’re doing well too Kip. karuna

Response:

Jan, I’m doing fairly well now thanks. On the 30th I’m having what might be my final DMPS. I’m getting a 24 hour urine test after. I’ll still need some EDTA treatment for arsenic. On the 14th of next month I’m going to an oral surgeon to have some of my cavatations taken care of. Best wishes, Kip – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – About my position on mercury and MS, I don’t think mercury causes true MS. However, the effects of mercury poisoning are indistinguishable from MS. I think many people who think that they have MS, actually have mercury poisoning and many, like myself, have both MS and mercury poisoning. I think I have MS, because the blood tests I’ve had done by Dr. Lindner http://www.sky.net/~dporter/MSCFSABX.htm indicate that I have a bacterium that he links, although not yet conclusively, with MS. Thqnks for your post Kip. That is why we need more studies. It seems to affect people in different ways Jeff Clark says the mercury caused his CFS. Others believe it causes fibro. and the list goes on. I do believe it caused my peripheral neuropathy. How you are doing well. Jan

Response:

About my position on mercury and MS, I don’t think mercury causes true MS. However, the effects of mercury poisoning are indistinguishable from MS. I think many people who think that they have MS, actually have mercury poisoning and many, like myself, have both MS and mercury poisoning. I think I have MS, because the blood tests I’ve had done by Dr. Lindner http://www.sky.net/~dporter/MSCFSABX.htm indicate that I have a bacterium that he links, although not yet conclusively, with MS.

Thqnks for your post Kip. That is why we need more studies. It seems to affect people in different ways Jeff Clark says the mercury caused his CFS. Others believe it causes fibro. and the list goes on. I do believe it caused my peripheral neuropathy. How you are doing well. Jan

Response:

When I put up the results of a trial showing strong placebo responses in persons believing they had mercury toxicity

I don’t understand this Peter, do you mean you posted the results? I was advised by the amalgam believers that it takes a couple of months for the mercury to get out of the system.

What amalgam believers? It takes years to get ALL the mercury out of the system, especially the brain. Seems the science of this condition varies with the times.

That depends of the number of amalgams and how long one waits to get them removed. Here we have one story of complete relief of symptoms within days and another within ten days (in MS, a condition known for wide natural fluctuations in symptoms).

Wide natural fluctuations in symptoms? Please explain this. Please think carefully, people, before having amalgams removed.

Yes. Be sure to find a very good alt. dentist who follows the correct procedure. There is no solid information to support this action.

What do you means by *solid*? There is plenty of information about mercury amalgams being the cause of many diseases. MS MC,CFS, fibro, AND mercury poisioning. Other clinical trials show no correlation between the low mercury blood levels seen in people with amalgams and symptoms.

Low mercury blood? How about high mercury blood? Many times a single blood test doesn’t show the mercury deep in the tissue. And there are clinic trials that *DO* show a definite correlation. They have been posted here numerous times. It you have a problem that the doctor can’t find, PLEASE CHECK THE TEETH! Many ,many people are finding relief after the metal is removed. Then it’s on to chelation to get the mercury out of the system. Some do it with DMPS, DSMA, while others are having success with supplements. You will need to find a doctor who is open to the fact that amalgams can INDEED cause mercury poisioning. Please do some research and don’t let those doctors who are locked into a little scientific box stop you!! I took me two years and $20,000 to find the problem, in the meantime I nearly died. Both Kip King (who posts here) I have mercury poisioning. Kip even posted his results, and still some chose NOT to believe him. I believe Peter is saying that it is all a placebo response. WRONG! People don’t run out on a whim, and have the metal removed. They do some research, compare the symptoms, and start on the long journey. If the amalgams are the problem, get them replaced. Don’t wait! You must get rid of the cause, then start ridding the system. These stories such as I posted are true, people don’t make them up. Knowing that many countries are facing the problem, working on bans, having placed restrictions, still doing studies and no longer using mercury amalgams in children is a SURE sign that mercury is indeed a problem. The only reason we are behind here in the US, is because doctors, dentists and the ADA don’t want any change. We see more and more people speaking up. Hopefully this will get some action going. More and more dentist are brave enough to make the change. In the beginning any dentist who removed metal had his license jerked. Thank God for the brave ones!! Many people are suffering needless, while some doctors are waiting for *solid* evidence. These same doctors will be very reluctant to admit they were wrong, finding some flaw in the studies. There are doctors and dentists who are open minded. Find one, ASAP! This comes from one who *has* mercury poisoning. Solid as a rock. Jan

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was advised by the amalgam believers that it takes a couple of months for the mercury to get out of the system. What amalgam believers? It takes years to get ALL the mercury out of the system, especially the brain. Yes, but Jan, you claimed within DAYS of having your amalgams removed that you felt better than you had in YEARS.

That’s correct. I also say part of it was the relief that it was all over. However most all people do feel better immediately. This is not uncommon. With mercury poisioning the effects are reoccurring. I have monthy cycles. I may feel really good one day and be off my feet the next. Your dramatic improvement within days of the removal strongly suggests a placebo response accounting for the change. But if you want to believe that you had mercury poisoning to account for your symptoms then that is your choice. The important thing is that you are feeling better. Try not to respond defensively to this post

Thank you Rich. Except for the part of if I want to believe I have mercury poisioning. I KNOW I have mercury poisioning and yes I have the records to prove it. And no I’m not going to send to AF or post them here. If you don’t want to believe me, that is your choice. I sure hope this doesn’t sound defensive. And I feeling much better. Sincerely, Jan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Aloha, Rich Lab testing is part of the trap of scientific lunacy that surrounds us today Connie

Response:

When I put up the results of a trial showing strong placebo responses in persons believing they had mercury toxicity I was advised by the amalgam believers that it takes a couple of months for the mercury to get out of the system. Seems the science of this condition varies with the times. Here we have one story of complete relief of symptoms within days and another within ten days (in MS, a condition known for wide natural fluctuations in symptoms). Please think carefully, people, before having amalgams removed. There is no solid information to support this action. Other clinical trials show no correlation between the low mercury blood levels seen in people with amalgams and symptoms. — P Moran

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -In 1982 I, suddenly had a bad pain in my left eye and went blind in that eye; the opthalmologist (graduate of Johns Hopkins) diagnosed it as retrobuldar neuritis. He told me it could be Multple Sclerosis. I rejected that diagnosis. Steroids were my only option of treatment, which I also rejected. After approx. 2 months of complete blindness, in that eye, pain had subsided as the inflammation subsided, but nerve damage was not rrectable (so they said) After using visualization techniques, it started to clear up. (I read many books on these techniques, and other books, like Norman Cousins, "Anatomy of an Illness.") The doctors were amazed that I gained sight back. (My theory was, if my brain could tell my hand, for instance, to pick something up, and it would respond, then why couldn’t my brain tell my body, internally, to do things, as well. So, I used visualization techniques to tell my brain to send things to blast away the scarred tissue on my optic nerve, so the electrical impulses which allowed me to see, could get transmitted down the nerve, once more. This did indeed work and although I doubt I will ever get full vision back in that eye (I don’t do those techniques anymore) I can see out of my left eye, although it is like looking through a screen, there are holes in my vision field, and colors don’t look the same anymore. The following year, the double vision abruptly interrupted my life and spinal taps, MRI’s, and a barrage of nuerological tests "confirmed" the diagnosis of MS. This time I endured the steroids (and the side effects.) The spinal fluid did not show MS, but the "confirmation" was made by the double vision and the plaque or scarring on my brain shown by the MRI’s. The steroids, it is said, do not work for everyone, but I could see the two separate images gradually coming together as one over a period of 3 months, so the doctors claimed I was steroid sensitive and so they did indeed work for me. Next year, my balance was affected and rotary nystgmus (eyes move on their own and shake constantly) set in. Again, steroids, visualization (my idea again, doctors, of course, poo-poo’d that idea) and 2 months of time made it go away. Through the next few years, I endured depression (attributed to the diagnosis) fatique, blurred vision, nervousness, anxiety, weakness in my limbs, tingling sensations, burning sensations and various pain. (All attributed to the MS, but I rejected steroid treatment and opted for just my own method of treatment: distraction in the form of reckless behavior, ie, sky diving, impulsive behavior, drinking to excess, manic behavior, etc. It was around that time, 60 Minutes reported the amalgam/mercury story. I had 11 large amalgam fillings. My cousin was a dentist and removed all of them, at one time, and replaced them with gold (now I wish I had opted for composite material, but the gold doesn’t seem to cause me all that many problems). Within 10 days, I had NO more symptoms of MS! Very few people, including my doctors and my cousin, the dentist, believed me. I didn’t care, I KNEW it was from the mercury!! (Thank God for that TV report!) MS is said to exacerbate with stress. Well, I have endured much stress since having my fillings replaced: the birth of my son too early, my husband of 15 years being suddenly and tragically decapitated in a car accident, losing all my money and assets to a con artist, to name a few. These stressors did not bring on any symptoms, as surely would have if the diagnosis of MS were correct. However, the medical profession will not see it’s way clear to UNdiagnose the MS; making health insurance exhorbitant, for one thing. This has been a long, but educational trek. I HAVE NO DOUBT I was mercury poisoned and still endure some after effects. I did not do any chelation, I didn’t know about it back then. I feel extremely strong about getting the message out and making "whom ever it is" that approves mercury use to STOP! I would like to go back to school to become whatever I need to to get the necessary credentials (not sure what they are, though) to do research, writing, etc. to get paid for a working against this practice of using mercury, about which I am so passionate, interested and directly affected by. I wish everyone affected by mercury all the best of luck in beating this thing If there are any questions about my experiences, please send me an email or posting and I will be glad to answer. Sincerely,

Response:

Yes, I ahve a few such stories on file. Can I use yours? John

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In 1982 I, suddenly had a bad pain in my left eye and went blind in that eye; the opthalmologist (graduate of Johns Hopkins) diagnosed it as retrobuldar neuritis. He told me it could be Multple Sclerosis. I rejected that diagnosis. Steroids were my only option of treatment, which I also rejected. After approx. 2 months of complete blindness, in that eye, pain had subsided as the inflammation subsided, but nerve damage was not rrectable (so they said) After using visualization techniques, it started to clear up. (I read many books on these techniques, and other books, like Norman Cousins, "Anatomy of an Illness.") The doctors were amazed that I gained sight back. (My theory was, if my brain could tell my hand, for instance, to pick something up, and it would respond, then why couldn’t my brain tell my body, internally, to do things, as well. So, I used visualization techniques to tell my brain to send things to blast away the scarred tissue on my optic nerve, so the electrical impulses which allowed me to see, could get transmitted down the nerve, once more. This did indeed work and although I doubt I will ever get full vision back in that eye (I don’t do those techniques anymore) I can see out of my left eye, although it is like looking through a screen, there are holes in my vision field, and colors don’t look the same anymore. The following year, the double vision abruptly interrupted my life and spinal taps, MRI’s, and a barrage of nuerological tests "confirmed" the diagnosis of MS. This time I endured the steroids (and the side effects.) The spinal fluid did not show MS, but the "confirmation" was made by the double vision and the plaque or scarring on my brain shown by the MRI’s. The steroids, it is said, do not work for everyone, but I could see the two separate images gradually coming together as one over a period of 3 months, so the doctors claimed I was steroid sensitive and so they did indeed work for me. Next year, my balance was affected and rotary nystgmus (eyes move on their own and shake constantly) set in. Again, steroids, visualization (my idea again, doctors, of course, poo-poo’d that idea) and 2 months of time made it go away. Through the next few years, I endured depression (attributed to the diagnosis) fatique, blurred vision, nervousness, anxiety, weakness in my limbs, tingling sensations, burning sensations and various pain. (All attributed to the MS, but I rejected steroid treatment and opted for just my own method of treatment: distraction in the form of reckless behavior, ie, sky diving, impulsive behavior, drinking to excess, manic behavior, etc. It was around that time, 60 Minutes reported the amalgam/mercury story. I had 11 large amalgam fillings. My cousin was a dentist and removed all of them, at one time, and replaced them with gold (now I wish I had opted for composite material, but the gold doesn’t seem to cause me all that many problems). Within 10 days, I had NO more symptoms of MS! Very few people, including my doctors and my cousin, the dentist, believed me. I didn’t care, I KNEW it was from the mercury!! (Thank God for that TV report!) MS is said to exacerbate with stress. Well, I have endured much stress since having my fillings replaced: the birth of my son too early, my husband of 15 years being suddenly and tragically decapitated in a car accident, losing all my money and assets to a con artist, to name a few. These stressors did not bring on any symptoms, as surely would have if the diagnosis of MS were correct. However, the medical profession will not see it’s way clear to UNdiagnose the MS; making health insurance exhorbitant, for one thing. This has been a long, but educational trek. I HAVE NO DOUBT I was mercury poisoned and still endure some after effects. I did not do any chelation, I didn’t know about it back then. I feel extremely strong about getting the message out and making "whom ever it is" that approves mercury use to STOP! I would like to go back to school to become whatever I need to to get the necessary credentials (not sure what they are, though) to do research, writing, etc. to get paid for a working against this practice of using mercury, about which I am so passionate, interested and directly affected by. I wish everyone affected by mercury all the best of luck in beating this thing If there are any questions about my experiences, please send me an email or posting and I will be glad to answer. Sincerely,

Response:

Thankyou Jan for the story, it was very enlightening. I was aware of the amalgam thingy from watching a few docos on the telly. My mother had hers removed and noticed an improvement within days and swears that she will never get them again, even in an emergency. It is nice to see that through natural ways and common sense we can get better without going through all that. Love and Light Steven

Response:

In 1982 I, suddenly had a bad pain in my left eye and went blind in that eye; the opthalmologist (graduate of Johns Hopkins) diagnosed it as retrobuldar neuritis. He told me it could be Multple Sclerosis. I rejected that diagnosis. Steroids were my only option of treatment, which I also rejected. After approx. 2 months of complete blindness, in that eye, pain had subsided as the inflammation subsided, but nerve damage was not rrectable (so they said) After using visualization techniques, it started to clear up. (I read many books on these techniques, and other books, like Norman Cousins, "Anatomy of an Illness.") The doctors were amazed that I gained sight back. (My theory was, if my brain could tell my hand, for instance, to pick something up, and it would respond, then why couldn’t my brain tell my body, internally, to do things, as well. So, I used visualization techniques to tell my brain to send things to blast away the scarred tissue on my optic nerve, so the electrical impulses which allowed me to see, could get transmitted down the nerve, once more. This did indeed work and although I doubt I will ever get full vision back in that eye (I don’t do those techniques anymore) I can see out of my left eye, although it is like looking through a screen, there are holes in my vision field, and colors don’t look the same anymore. The following year, the double vision abruptly interrupted my life and spinal taps, MRI’s, and a barrage of nuerological tests "confirmed" the diagnosis of MS. This time I endured the steroids (and the side effects.) The spinal fluid did not show MS, but the "confirmation" was made by the double vision and the plaque or scarring on my brain shown by the MRI’s. The steroids, it is said, do not work for everyone, but I could see the two separate images gradually coming together as one over a period of 3 months, so the doctors claimed I was steroid sensitive and so they did indeed work for me. Next year, my balance was affected and rotary nystgmus (eyes move on their own and shake constantly) set in. Again, steroids, visualization (my idea again, doctors, of course, poo-poo’d that idea) and 2 months of time made it go away. Through the next few years, I endured depression (attributed to the diagnosis) fatique, blurred vision, nervousness, anxiety, weakness in my limbs, tingling sensations, burning sensations and various pain. (All attributed to the MS, but I rejected steroid treatment and opted for just my own method of treatment: distraction in the form of reckless behavior, ie, sky diving, impulsive behavior, drinking to excess, manic behavior, etc. It was around that time, 60 Minutes reported the amalgam/mercury story. I had 11 large amalgam fillings. My cousin was a dentist and removed all of them, at one time, and replaced them with gold (now I wish I had opted for composite material, but the gold doesn’t seem to cause me all that many problems). Within 10 days, I had NO more symptoms of MS! Very few people, including my doctors and my cousin, the dentist, believed me. I didn’t care, I KNEW it was from the mercury!! (Thank God for that TV report!) MS is said to exacerbate with stress. Well, I have endured much stress since having my fillings replaced: the birth of my son too early, my husband of 15 years being suddenly and tragically decapitated in a car accident, losing all my money and assets to a con artist, to name a few. These stressors did not bring on any symptoms, as surely would have if the diagnosis of MS were correct. However, the medical profession will not see it’s way clear to UNdiagnose the MS; making health insurance exhorbitant, for one thing. This has been a long, but educational trek. I HAVE NO DOUBT I was mercury poisoned and still endure some after effects. I did not do any chelation, I didn’t know about it back then. I feel extremely strong about getting the message out and making "whom ever it is" that approves mercury use to STOP! I would like to go back to school to become whatever I need to to get the necessary credentials (not sure what they are, though) to do research, writing, etc. to get paid for a working against this practice of using mercury, about which I am so passionate, interested and directly affected by. I wish everyone affected by mercury all the best of luck in beating this thing If there are any questions about my experiences, please send me an email or posting and I will be glad to answer. Sincerely,

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accounting
Tags: Accounting

Accounting Talk » Business Accounting » MYOB question

MYOB question

Question:

James Bond wrote … I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables.

Look in HELP under BAD DEBTS.

Response:

Hi 007! want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB.

You do this by posting a "negative" sale — use a sales invoice, select your deadbeat customer, select your "bad debt" expense account, post the $$ (or "pound") value of the write-off with a minus sign (ie -100) and post the sale. Then, select "settle credits" from the sales screen and offset the original invoice with this negative sale you created. ps: if you charged VAT on the original invoice, be sure to claim this back on you next remittance.

Response:

I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB.

HELP/CUE CARDS/SEARCH/FIND….bad (for Bad Debt) Hope this helps! Mike <<<<<< MIKE FISHER & ASSOCIATES …oOo… "The Help Line for Small Business" Computer, Accounting and Bookkeeping Support in NQ Ph (07) 4779 6761 or 018 180 684 www.ozemail.com.au/~mfisher

Response:

Use payment from Customer option in the Sales module as though it is a payment. Then, use GL journal to reverse the entry from bank ( Dr Bank, Cr Bad Debts).

Sorry but Patrick’s w’ong Credit Bad Debt?????? <<<<<< MIKE FISHER & ASSOCIATES …oOo… "The Help Line for Small Business" Computer, Accounting and Bookkeeping Support in NQ Ph (07) 4779 6761 or 018 180 684 www.ozemail.com.au/~mfisher

Response:

Not sure of the specifics of MYOB. But you could raise a credit note perhaps? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone- I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB. Thanks in advance, please post to group.

Response:

Accounting entries should be Dr Bad Debt, Cr Bank. Apologies for mistake made and confusion. Regards, Patrick – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone- I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB. Thanks in advance, please post to group.

Response:

Anyone- I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB. Thanks in advance, please post to group.

Response:

Use payment from Customer option in the Sales module as though it is a payment. Then, use GL journal to reverse the entry from bank ( Dr Bank, Cr Bad Debts). Regards, Patrick – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anyone- I have an outstanding invoice from a customer that will not pay it. I want to right it off and get it out of my receivables. Can someone suggest how to accomplish this in MYOB. Thanks in advance, please post to group.

Response:

Hello, Is there an easy way to get MYOB to include previous unpaid balances when it creates invoices? I am using MYOB version 7.0. Thanks, Bruce Demske

Response:

Is there an easy way to get MYOB to include previous unpaid balances when it creates invoices? I am using MYOB version 7.0.

I don’t use MYOB, but your question appears to indicate confusion between an INVOICE and a STATEMENT. In any accounting system that I know, an invoice represents a single transaction (therefore no "previous unpaid balance" data) and a STATEMENT summarizes previous transactions. I’d be surprised if MYOB were any different.

Response:

Yes, I’m agree w/ Mr. Paige. Tell us more about it. rgds, Rama – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is there an easy way to get MYOB to include previous unpaid balances when it creates invoices? I am using MYOB version 7.0. I don’t use MYOB, but your question appears to indicate confusion between an INVOICE and a STATEMENT. In any accounting system that I know, an invoice represents a single transaction (therefore no "previous unpaid balance" data) and a STATEMENT summarizes previous transactions. I’d be surprised if MYOB were any different.

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Business Accounting
Tags: Business Accounting

Accounting Talk » Office Accounting » What in the world is a burn rate?

What in the world is a burn rate?

Question:

Will someone please tell me what a burn rate is? My boss wants the burn rate for our department by next Monday. I know it’s accounting related but I don’t want to look like a complete idiot and ask him what in the world he is talking about. Thanks. Mike

Response:

I’ve never seen it used in an accounting sense. Have seen is used in aviation in terms of gallons or pounds of fuel used per hour.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Will someone please tell me what a burn rate is? My boss wants the burn rate for our department by next Monday. I know it’s accounting related but I don’t want to look like a complete idiot and ask him what in the world he is talking about. Thanks. Mike

Response:

I have heard it used as slang for the average amount spent (per task, or per a period of time) Like the burn rate of part x, is y amount of dollars per month. Also can be in managerial accounting for the number of parts per period, the burn rate is 450 widgets per month. Don’t know the ‘proper’ definition of it. Kevin – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve never seen it used in an accounting sense. Have seen is used in aviation in terms of gallons or pounds of fuel used per hour. Will someone please tell me what a burn rate is? My boss wants the burn rate for our department by next Monday. I know it’s accounting related but I don’t want to look like a complete idiot and ask him what in the world he is talking about. Thanks. Mike

Response:

Your boss is asking what the net negative cash flow is for your department. He wants to know what the sum of the expenses, not counting depreciation are? He may or may not be interested in things like energy costs. If you’re in an office the "burn rate" would be pretty close to payroll, if you’re a manufacturing plant, then you would include utilities, insurance and other "out of pocket" annual expenses. When someone wants the burn rate, they usually are interested in a monthly average, but if its a hotel or nursing home for example, daily could be what they’re after. Wins

Response:

Tell your boss you’ll have that for him as soon as he can give you the "estimated relative kindling report". Steph Will someone please tell me what a burn rate is?

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Office Accounting
Tags: Office Accounting

Accounting Talk » Accountants » Human cloning

Human cloning

Question:

Anne wrote a critique on my post based on thinking that cloning is actually "In Vitro fertilization". But its not, because that involves a father’s and mother’s DNA being combined.

Actually Walt, *you* missed the point. If a person were to clone herself, her DNA is already a combination of DNA from a man and a woman — her genetic parents. The clone would have the same DNA. So the genetic father would be the same man. The genetic mother would be the clonee’s mother. Cloning doesn’t retroactively abolish sexual reproduction. Rupa

Response:

Infertility treatments, birth control, organ transplants, immunizations, ad nauseum… are also "Playing God". Do you object to them as well? Just wondering. I wonder how cloning would affect the Nature vs Nurture research? Personally, I think that the idea of cloning human beings is repulsive. I certainly wouldn’t want to raise "ME". It’s so creepy. Kate Workman

Response:

Jade asked: It’s terrifying really… to think that there are no laws for this sort of thing because no one ever even thought this sort of sci-fi could exist. It’s similar to the mass panic that would be felt if aliens ever do land. What would we do?

Ten years later, we would be discussing the issues surrounding interspecies marriage and adoption. J.

Response:

Anne, your critique of my post would put me to shame if your knowledge was correct. However, when you fully understand what a clone is, go back an re-read my post. It may then make sense to you. Keep in mind some sarcasm is intended on my part.

Oh, Walt, get a sense of humor. You’re so uptight. I wasn’t trying to put you to shame. You do it so well to yourself! Anne — L. Anne Babb To save energy, do not go out lookin’ for trouble; chances are, it will find you soon enough. (Forrest Gump)

Response:

Sue: Of course I know that medicine has long been playing God…but it seems pretty obvious to me that vaccinations, antibiotics, transplants ect. are beneficial and needed. Technology should be used tobenefit everyone in need, no question. I cannot equate cloning with these necessary medical proceedures. Cloning seems to me to be taking medicine beyond a reasonable and humane limit. Besides being unnatural, unnecessary and and IMO very dangerous, there is no reasonable way to regulate an industry such as cloning..not that I can think of anyway. Just because we have the intelligence to accomplish this feat does not mean we should use it. This may be my Catholic upbringing speaking, I feel much the same way about abortion. I cannot justify an abortion (for myself), I don’t have the right to kill a child anymore than I have the right to clone a human. (Could be I’ve read too much Sci-fi, shades of Frankenstien come to mind…). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t even pretend to understand the scientific method used to clone a human…and I object to cloning, based solely on my own personal religious beliefs. To me, cloning is playing God…and I cannot agree with that. Tribe, Medicine has long been playing God. They’ve just gotten progressively more high tech in the last decade or so. Do you object to heart transplants? Vaccinations? Antibiotics? The more invasive assisted reproduction techniques? What about humanitarian efforts to airlift food to starving children in war-torn areas? What’s adoption but playing God? That said, regardless,I do not condone a ban on the research….I worry about restricting the science that allows cloning because, (if I understand it correctly), banning it could very easily put at risk legitimate medical research that could lead to some much needed medical advances. Very tight restriction should be placed on this science not by a bunch of Washington bureaucrats….qualified scientists in the field should police the activity. So those who might benefit financially will be those allowed to determine the future of cloning? That’s an interesting approach … one I don’t subscribe to. Sue T.

Response:

<snip There’s a good start! Don’t understand something, ban it! "Rush out" and "create new law" should go together as well as "hard liquor" and "handguns". You get about the same effect.

Your m.o. seems to be to embrace all new technology and dive into uncharted territory. Both the knee-jerk "ban it" and the "full speed ahead" modalities are equally worrisome to me. Yeah, sure, whatever. I’d think that the gene donor would be the "parent".

Think of artificial insemination, human variety. Surely you’re not thinking that the sperm donor is the "parent"??? Yep, sure. Just like knowing who the fathers are of today’s children insures that child support is always paid.

If only we knew who the mother and fathers of 2+% of "today’s children" are, I’d be delighted! Overjoyed! If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister? Yes.

And perhaps the source of much misery. Joy is also a possibility, but I have a little difficulty believeing that a mentally and emotionally healthy individual, especially one who enjoyed loving, long-term relationships with peers, would feel much desire to clone him/herself. Huh? This is supposed to be a reason? Geez, what about all the emotional harm cause to regular kids who suspect they are adopted. I think we should outlaw adoptions (mandate abortions) so that no child ever has to worry about being adopted.

Oh great. Do you have a sister named Jessica? Also, will this be defacto incest? Nope, not even masturbation.

I think he meant narcissim. I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking.

Okay, maybe he didn’t mean Narcissus. Time to brush up on your genetics. The genetic reason to discourage close relatives from mating is to reduce the chance that currently unexpressed (read that as "broken") genes common to both parents are the ones inherited by the child.

Imo, cultural reasons probably pre-dated the genetics underpinings of incest taboos. <snip all the Foos How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father?

A biological father who would be approximately 40 years old at the time of the clone’s birth, who might find the idea of cloning totally repugnant, who might not wish to accept the clone, who might be long dead. Ooh! Another argument to ban all activity based on childhood trauma. Kids like to call other kids "freak" already.

It’s when the clone calls himself a "freak" that I begin to worry. Imo, all children need and should have two adults who love and care for them … bare minimum. Sue T.

Response:

Why would you try to put words in my mouth? Did you already plunk down some cash for a clone? It’s odd how you attacked my post so vehemently when we agree on the basic point. Curiousity killed the cat. Complacency kills far more many cats. Stupidity kills more. Dumb luck wipes out quite a few. Never underestimate the fickle finger of fate. A curious cat that dies exploring, striving to…

I appreciate you expanding on what I said. Why don’t you calm down? I’m quite interested in hearing your point. Just wondering. How many cats are killed annually by forethought, caution and responsibility? This is a world issue and sooner or later some nut will authorize it or

do it. Only if ‘nut’ is defined as someone who doesn’t agree with you. How enlightened. Fortunately, we are not compelled to do only those things which aren’t "nutty", look at bungee jumping.

Granted. If you feel I am not enlightened is this your way of enlightening? How rude. Interesting how you compare bungee jumping to human cloning. Remember, countries compete technologically. It’s a prize to be the first, especially when it makes money. Yes, and?

And my point WAS that cloning is not unlikely which in my OPINION it seems that you agree. Why would you even write that snit? I’m sure there is a way to profit of this. Geez, profits are always evil? I thought that sometimes people profit because they have done something helpful or useful.

Again, you are putting words in my mouth and you completely missed the point. See above. There always is. Perhaps some eccentric rich types will be attracted to the concept of his own ‘immortality’. Lots of people see that in their children today. It’s not always a bad thing.

WHO said it was? I was giving reasons why cloning is likely. HELLO?? My children will continue a line that’s been unbroken for billions of years. I hope that line continues for billions more. I’ll do everything I can to give them the love, support, education, financial means, and yes, if I can, genetic makeup to make that happen. If I’m carrying a gene that pre-disposes me to cancer, and I can eliminate it from their genotype, I will. It’s none of your business. If I were to choose to have a child who is genetically identical to either myself or my wife, what business is it of yours? It is no more your business than what school I send my children to or whether I buy piano lessons from them.

Did someone do something terrible to you? Why are you so flippin’ angry? I promise I will never personally try to infringe on your right to procreate in any way. Now take a deep breath and relax. BTW, you raised some good points for debate. I’m just confused at why you did it is this manner. Do you think people can hear each other when their screaming? I hope you don’t try to pass along your communication skills gene. Much like cryogenics. Is cryonics a bad thing? Why? Do you contend that it can’t work, or do you contend that it may work, but shouldn’t? Why are you so comfortable in declaring how others should live and die?

What? I didn’t say it is either bad or good. I said cryogenics is much like cloning in that it is (in a sense) buying immortality. Why are YOU so comfortable in saying I declared how others should live and die? Are you confusing me with someone else? Besides, that’s what they said about test tube babies. I don’t know what "that" you are speaking of. There have been tens of thousands of in vitro fertilizations….

‘THAT’ is the whole point of the post. Sheesh. ‘That’ is the proclaimation that it is unlikely to ever happen. Get it yet??? It’s terrifying really… Why? Just because you declare it terrifying, doesn’t mean I have to take your word for it. …

The above and below is a continued thought. If you want to know why you should have continued reading. to think that there are no laws for this sort of thing because no one Why are you so eager to legislate other’s behaviour when you haven’t demonstrated any sort of threat other than your own vague "terror". Lot’s of nice …

—snip of an accusation that I want to enslave others— It is not a question of whether or not cloning is wrong. It is a question of whether or not humanity will have the skills to deal with this new unatural act. Go ahead. Try to tell me it’s natural and I will tell you all about bacteria learning how to grow genitalia. ever even thought this sort of sci-fi could exist. Same sort of sci-fi as airplanes, microwave ovens, VCRs, laprascopic sugery, CAT scans, MRIs, preservatives, anitbiotics, blood transfusions, indoor plumbing, etc.

Thank you for reiterating my point yet again. If you feel so strongly, I hear that Ted Kazynski’s land up in Montana is available.

‘If’ being the operative word. You never asked me to expand on how I feel. It’s similar to the mass panic that would be felt if aliens ever do land. Like the mass panic that happened when Louise Brown was born? Like the same panic that happened when Dolly was announced? Geez, they must have swept those bodies off the street mighty damn fastbecause…

—snip some blah blah blah — I was referring to a legislative panic. I strongly disagree with you if you feel that human cloning will not be a headline news story and its issues debated in virtually every country of the world. Your sacasm becomes you, by the way. What would we do? Cheer, smile silently at all the technophobes working on their ulcers, and then get back to work.

Is that your opinion or a fact? Jade

Response:

<snip I forgot to add, Walt, what cloning has to do with adoption. The fellow who says he’s going to clone humans within the next few years has stated outright that he intends to do this through a FERTILITY clinic. This is the way that people with fertility problems can be assured of having a healthy child, if they can carry the child to term themselves, or get someone else to do it for them. Imagine that, children on demand. I’d call it Dr. Moreau, not Dr. Frankenstein, Anne — L. Anne Babb To save energy, do not go out lookin’ for trouble; chances are, it will find you soon enough. (Forrest Gump)

Response:

Back in March or April Pat Robertson addressed the cloning issue on 700 CLub one morning. He was against it (which is no surprise), but he asked a rather telling question: "What would their legal status be? Would clones be like adoptees?" By all means necessary, Marley *****BASTARD NATION***** www.bastards.org

Response:

If I understand correctly, this cloning a person, is to get the best athelete, the most intelligent person, and then to remove all the bad genetic codes from a human, so that the human was perfect, in all ways, Physically, Mentally, Emotionally,

No, right now the people who want to do the cloning are wanting to do it for the money, i.e., working through fertility clinics for people who can’t conceive children naturally and who want to raise their own genetic material (i.e., selves?). One person, A Scientist, said, something to the effect, that GOD was smart, but when get this Clones done, they will be smarter, than GOD.

In the interview I read, the scientist said that we would be "equal" to God, doing God’s work, being co-creators with God. The thing is, the genetic stuff of creation, fertilized eggs and sperm, are still God’s domain. Nobody has created a synthetic egg, synthetic sperm, or synthetic embryo. Kind of reminds me of those Babylonians, saying, "Let’s build this thing up to heaven and be equal with God," or how about Lucifer, saying, "I will ascend unto the throne of God." It didn’t work for them very well, but, hey, who knows? AMERICANS have never tried ascending unto the throne of God yet, by golly! Looks to me like this Scientist, want to do away with us as humans, since we all do not think alike, look alike, act alike, beleive alike. Then they will have what they think is the perfect human, when they clone what they think is the most perfect person,

Oh, clones are still human. They are already-fertilized eggs that grew into fetuses, then were born and became people. That’s all they are: copies of other people, and they would be people in their own rights, just as monozygotic (identical) twins, who share identical DNA, are each people in their own rights. Just think, if all of this clones, were attorneys, were accountants, were bankers, or were all of any other profession, what would this world be like?

Well, I’d kind of like to have a clone of myself, but a grown one who lived here at home with all of us. Actually, I think it would take about four clones to do the job and relieve me of all my responsibilities. Problem is, being clones of me, they would all be bull-headed and they’d fight over their assigned duties. The Career Clone would probably want to be the Sex Kitten Clone. The Mom Clone would want to be the Wife Clone and both would whine about how come they never got to wear lingerie from Victoria’s Secret. The Career Clone would be upset that she didn’t get to cuddle in bed in the mornings with the babies. And the kids would be SO confused. When they went to bed at night, would they have to say, "Goodnight Mom, Goodnight, Mom, Goodnight, Mom, Goodnight, Mom, Goodnight, Mom"? So, see, cloning isn’t such a good idea after all. Please someone else, send what they they beleive will happen if this clones are allowed to be made, of humans, so they will be living, breathing, robots of the human beings.

No, Will, they won’t be robots. They will be human beings. If someone cloned you, that would be YOU at five months old, learning to sit up. That would be Little Will, at age 5, learning to ride a two-wheeler. That would be Little Will, at age 9, out on the soccer field. That would be Teenage Will, at age 16, getting his driver’s license. He’d be a copy of you, but because the environment he’d be raised in would be totally different from the one you were raised in, he would also be unlike you in some (or many) ways. Just think: If they could get Elvis’s DNA, we could have another Elvis! Anne Against Cloning, And Just Having Fun — L. Anne Babb To save energy, do not go out lookin’ for trouble; chances are, it will find you soon enough. (Forrest Gump)

Response:

Tribe, Medicine has long been playing God. They’ve just gotten progressively more high tech in the last decade or so. Do you object to heart transplants? Vaccinations? Antibiotics? The more invasive assisted reproduction techniques? What about humanitarian efforts to airlift food to starving children in war-torn areas? What’s adoption but playing God? That said, regardless,I do not condone a ban on the research….I worry about restricting the science that allows cloning because, (if I understand it correctly), banning it could very easily put at risk legitimate medical research that could lead to some much needed medical advances. Very tight restriction should be placed on this science not by a bunch of Washington bureaucrats….qualified scientists in the field should police the activity.

So those who might benefit financially will be those allowed to determine the future of cloning? That’s an interesting approach … one I don’t subscribe to. Sue T.

Response:

<snip Yup. No reason it shouldn’t.

The addition of "in my opinion" might be wise. Complacency kills far more many cats. Stupidity kills more. Dumb luck wipes out quite a few. Never underestimate the fickle finger of fate. A curious cat that dies exploring, striving to be somthing more than it is today, is really the only one that was ever fully alive in the first place. Life isn’t meant to be lived in a stupor. Explorers and cowards both wind up in the same palce, but the path they took made all the difference.

And this is your personal philosophy? Only if ‘nut’ is defined as someone who doesn’t agree with you. How enlightened. Fortunately, we are not compelled to do only those things which aren’t "nutty", look at bungee jumping.

Good example! Are you also a bungee jumper? Remember, countries compete technologically. It’s a prize to be the first, especially when it makes money.

Thank you for providing one of the reasons why technology, babies, and financial incentives should never be mixed. Geez, profits are always evil? I thought that sometimes people profit because they have done something helpful or useful.

On this ng (and in real life) we’ve seen more than a few entrepreneurs who sought their fame and fortune, doing something "helpful or useful" in the adoption field. Unfortunately, when profits enter the picture, ethics are often driven out, in some cases overnight. And of course, the babies are those who are likely to suffer first and most. Lots of people see that in their children today. It’s not always a bad thing. My children will continue a line that’s been unbroken for billions of years.

Are you a father NOW? I hope that line continues for billions more. I’ll do everything I can to give them the love, support, education, financial means, and yes, if I can, genetic makeup to make that happen. If I’m carrying a gene that pre-disposes me to cancer, and I can eliminate it from their genotype, I will. It’s none of your business.

There we totally disagree. If I were to choose to have a child who is genetically identical to either myself or my wife, what business is it of yours?

It’s my business and that of every member of society if we subscribe to the notion that children can and must be protected against some of their parent’s ideas. Just as it’s my business if you book passage for your child with the Heaven’s Gaters. It is no more your business than what school I send my children to or whether I buy piano lessons from them.

If the school is unlicensed and/or accused of wrongdoing, it’s my business. And if questions are raised about the school, then inquiries might be made concerning the piano teacher … and many other facets of your decision-making. Is cryonics a bad thing? Why? Do you contend that it can’t work, or do you contend that it may work, but shouldn’t? Why are you so comfortable in declaring how others should live and die? I don’t know what "that" you are speaking of. There have been tens of thousands of in vitro fertilizations since Louise Brown was born back in 1979. As far as I know, they haven’t turned in to brain eating monsters. As far as I know, they are as happy and healthy as any other group of children.

Perhaps you would care to do a bit of research on the matter before expounding so loudly and forcefully. Why? Just because you declare it terrifying, doesn’t mean I have to take your word for it. Now, 16 year olds with driver’s licenses, that’s terrifying!

An interesting generalization. Did you think YOU were terrifying when you began to drive? Did you do so at age 16? (There’s an analogy to be drawn there … do I need to explicitly state it?) Why are you so eager to legislate other’s behaviour when you haven’t demonstrated any sort of threat other than your own vague "terror". Lot’s of nice white folks were terrified at the prospect of allowing other people to marry outside of their "race". What is different about your position. You both want to enslave others because of your fears. ever even thought this sort of sci-fi could exist. Same sort of sci-fi as airplanes, microwave ovens, VCRs, laprascopic sugery, CAT scans, MRIs, preservatives, anitbiotics, blood transfusions, indoor plumbing, etc.

We have someone on this ng who feels that "technology rulz". Is that also your position? Like the mass panic that happened when Louise Brown was born? Like the same panic that happened when Dolly was announced? Geez, they must have swept those bodies off the street mighty damn fast because I sure didn’t see them (of course, I probably slept in late).

That the American public is so apathetic and unschooled in logic is the truly terrifying crisis for me. That, combined with people like you seem to be who are pushing for undue haste in technology without the ethical considerations being fully explored. Cheer, smile silently at all the technophobes working on their ulcers, and then get back to work.

An interesting pov. No ulcers here and no technophobia. Sue T.

Response:

<snip That’s called selective breeding and is the antithesis of cloning.

The antithesis? I don’t think so. Both are "assisted reproduction" techniques that have potential for good and ill. Fourth, why do you think everyone would converge onto the same idea of "superior"? Sure, a lot of americans would end up selecting for some common physical traits.

Perhaps because that’s what’s happened with past manipulation of other genetic material. The end result is more likely, imo, to be less rather than more diversity. Why isn’t that their right?

Again with the preeminent rights of adults and little or no consideration for the rights of the children born. We do that today, albeit crudely, by selecting mates who have traits we like. This won’t, however, lead to a world of only one type of person.

Are you issuing a guarantee? Different families would place emphasis on different traits and skills. Some would lean towards music or other arts. Others towards the athletic talents. Others towards more rational, scientific thinkers.

I think this probably represents your hope, rather than your latest peek into some bound-to-happen crystal ball. <snip All of the genetic musical material in the world won’t come to anything without the child raised in a loving, supportive home.

Another one of your pronouncements, delivered as fact, when it seems to me to be nothing more than your hope. What we are likely to end up selecting for are good parenting skills.

Good parenting skills aren’t in need of technomax. They can be had today for little or no $$$, just an investment of time, love, sensitivity, etc. Let’s turn this question around. Who are you to say that human development should stop here? Why are accidents good, noble, or moral, but conscious, deliberate planning is evil or depraved? Who are you to say that a parent isn’t allowed to make every effort that they can to insure that their children aren’t the happiest, healthiest, best educated, etc. That isn’t just a right, I feel it is a duty.

Oh Lordy. <snip God argument Are you saying we are so perfect in all ways that no room for change must ever be allowed?

I have no idea what he will say. I say that we haven’t a clue as to the possible repercussions of cloning and therefore should be very very cautious about too much manipulation. How enlightened of you. We look and act nothing like our ancestors of 100,000+ years ago.

Hyperbole? Or is that a just plain silly statement? In fact, we wouldn’t even consider them fully human. Do you consider our existence at the expense of those long dead ancestors to be evil? If so, please go out and shoot yourself. If not, then why should we view the prospect of future generations that continue to change from what we are today as any more evil? The important thing is that continue to live, and learn, and fall in love, and write songs, and build their culture, and all the thousands of other things that we have been doing for a very long time. Whether our lifespan is 30, 60, or 3000 years won’t change that. Whether our IQ is 30, 100, or 10000 won’t change that. Whether our vocabulary is 3000, 30000, or 30000000 words won’t change that.

Do you really believe that the outermost options won’t result in change? Anyone who believes in the concept of "the most perfect human" is doomed to be sorely disappointed. There would be a temporary glut of attourneys, bankers, etc. They would overpopulate their niche. They would starve and die

Well maybe I am in favor of this technology after all … for unethical adoption professionals. <snip None of this would change.

I am of the opinion that your simplistic assurances are every bit as frightening as the technology. -JohnG

An engineer? Would you mind telling us what type engineer you are? And whether you’re still in school or gainfully (?) employed. Thanks. Sue T.

Response:

First I think all the states need to rush out and create a new law that says that if a scientist (male or female) clones another human being from a female, he/she is legally the "father". This will solve the child-support issue. However, it might not minimize the chances the clone might have to be put up for adoption, should some classic reason come along. IRONY: If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister? EMOTIONAL HARM: You know its bad enough for adoptees that they face certain emotional consequences for being given up by one or both birth parents and now there is the possibility that some girl may grow up wondering if the woman that gave birth to her is her mother or her twin-sister? "SIN?" Also, will this be defacto incest? I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking. MORE EMOTIONAL HARM: How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father? I know I for one would feel like a "freak". And no doubt, youthful peers who found me out would all call me "freak’. Yes folks, Dr. Frankenstein is on the scene.

Response:

Have concern about this CLONING a person, Looking for some good feedback on your feelings, and ideas. If I understand correctly, this cloning a person, is to get the best athelete, the most intelligent person, and then to remove all the bad genetic codes from a human, so that the human was perfect, in all ways, Physically, Mentally, Emotionally, Then the could take this genetic eggs, from a female, and make a whole human race out of people who were the best of everthing into each human, Therefore eliminating the need for us, (humans of today With either phyical, Mental, Emotional, problems, The idea is to crete, the perfect human being, and then make several of them, This people would be, the best of the best, in sports, an extremely high IQ, type of person, One person, A Scientist, said, something to the effect, that GOD was smart, but when get this Clones done, they will be smarter, than GOD. Looks to me like this Scientist, want to do away with us as humans, since we all do not think alike, look alike, act alike, beleive alike. Then they will have what they think is the perfect human, when they clone what they think is the most perfect person, Just think, if all of this clones, were attorneys, were accountants, were bankers, or were all of any other profession, what would this world be like? Part of the reason for living on this earth, is the feeling of ones own identity. Their own feelings, their own believes, their own roots. Please someone else, send what they they beleive will happen if this clones are allowed to be made, of humans, so they will be living, breathing, robots of the human beings. WillWeat, from TN,

Response:

I can’t even pretend to understand the scientific method used to clone a human…and I object to cloning, based solely on my own personal religious beliefs. To me, cloning is playing God…and I cannot agree with that. That said, regardless,I do not condone a ban on the research….I worry about restricting the science that allows cloning because, (if I understand it correctly), banning it could very easily put at risk legitimate medical research that could lead to some much needed medical advances. Very tight restriction should be placed on this science not by a bunch of Washington bureaucrats….qualified scientists in the field should police the activity. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – First I think all the states need to rush out and create a new law There’s a good start! Don’t understand something, ban it! "Rush out" and "create new law" should go together as well as "hard liquor" and "handguns". You get about the same effect. that says that if a scientist (male or female) clones another human being from a female, he/she is legally the "father". Yeah, sure, whatever. I’d think that the gene donor would be the "parent". This will solve the child-support issue. Yep, sure. Just like knowing who the fathers are of today’s children insures that child support is always paid. If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister? Yes. You know its bad enough for adoptees that they face certain emotional consequences for being given up by one or both birth parents and now there is the possibility that some girl may grow up wondering if the woman that gave birth to her is her mother or her twin-sister? Huh? This is supposed to be a reason? Geez, what about all the emotional harm cause to regular kids who suspect they are adopted. I think we should outlaw adoptions (mandate abortions) so that no child ever has to worry about being adopted. Also, will this be defacto incest? Nope, not even masturbation. I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking. Time to brush up on your genetics. The genetic reason to discourage close relatives from mating is to reduce the chance that currently unexpressed (read that as "broken") genes common to both parents are the ones inherited by the child. So, let’s say we have a gene called Foo. There are three alleles: FooA, FooB, nad FooA’. If a person has at least one FooA or FooB, the lead happy productive lives. If they only have FooA’, then they are condemned to a horrible libe of festering boils and "Laverne and Shirley" reruns. So, let’s say who have to impetuous siblings, sib1 and sib2, who are the product of mom and pop. We could get the following genetic distribution (remember each person gets two alleles of each gene): mom: FooA FooB pop: FooA’ FooB So, by the powers of Gregor Mendel… sib1: FooA’ FooA sib2: FooA’ FooB We invoke Mendel again to create the incestuous bastard… bas1: FooA’ FooA’ It doesn’t matter that FooA’ only occurs in 0.001 per 100,000 people. These two love crossed kids have a 1 in 4 chance of producing our boil covered couch potato. This isn’t the case with a clone. The clone has the same genetic makeup as the donor. If the donor is genetically healthy, the the offspring will be equally endowed (barring point mutations, which are a serious issue actually). How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father? Clones would, it’s the same male that was the father to the donor. I know I for one would feel like a "freak". And no doubt, youthful peers who found me out would all call me "freak’. Ooh! Another argument to ban all activity based on childhood trauma. Kids like to call other kids "freak" already. Sometimes it’s because of what they look like, or how they speak, or what their parents do. I guess in your wold everyone should walk, talk, and look alike in order to avoid any potential for harrassment, ever. Sounds like you want a Yes folks, Dr. Frankenstein is on the scene. So is the crowd that cried for Barabbus. Who did the greater evil? -JohnG

Response:

First I think all the states need to rush out and create a new law

There’s a good start! Don’t understand something, ban it! "Rush out" and "create new law" should go together as well as "hard liquor" and "handguns". You get about the same effect. that says that if a scientist (male or female) clones another human being from a female, he/she is legally the "father".

Yeah, sure, whatever. I’d think that the gene donor would be the "parent". This will solve the child-support issue.

Yep, sure. Just like knowing who the fathers are of today’s children insures that child support is always paid. If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister?

Yes. You know its bad enough for adoptees that they face certain emotional consequences for being given up by one or both birth parents and now there is the possibility that some girl may grow up wondering if the woman that gave birth to her is her mother or her twin-sister?

Huh? This is supposed to be a reason? Geez, what about all the emotional harm cause to regular kids who suspect they are adopted. I think we should outlaw adoptions (mandate abortions) so that no child ever has to worry about being adopted. Also, will this be defacto incest?

Nope, not even masturbation. I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking.

Time to brush up on your genetics. The genetic reason to discourage close relatives from mating is to reduce the chance that currently unexpressed (read that as "broken") genes common to both parents are the ones inherited by the child. So, let’s say we have a gene called Foo. There are three alleles: FooA, FooB, nad FooA’. If a person has at least one FooA or FooB, the lead happy productive lives. If they only have FooA’, then they are condemned to a horrible libe of festering boils and "Laverne and Shirley" reruns. So, let’s say who have to impetuous siblings, sib1 and sib2, who are the product of mom and pop. We could get the following genetic distribution (remember each person gets two alleles of each gene): mom: FooA FooB pop: FooA’ FooB So, by the powers of Gregor Mendel… sib1: FooA’ FooA sib2: FooA’ FooB We invoke Mendel again to create the incestuous bastard… bas1: FooA’ FooA’ It doesn’t matter that FooA’ only occurs in 0.001 per 100,000 people. These two love crossed kids have a 1 in 4 chance of producing our boil covered couch potato. This isn’t the case with a clone. The clone has the same genetic makeup as the donor. If the donor is genetically healthy, the the offspring will be equally endowed (barring point mutations, which are a serious issue actually). How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father?

Clones would, it’s the same male that was the father to the donor. I know I for one would feel like a "freak". And no doubt, youthful peers who found me out would all call me "freak’.

Ooh! Another argument to ban all activity based on childhood trauma. Kids like to call other kids "freak" already. Sometimes it’s because of what they look like, or how they speak, or what their parents do. I guess in your wold everyone should walk, talk, and look alike in order to avoid any potential for harrassment, ever. Sounds like you want a Yes folks, Dr. Frankenstein is on the scene.

So is the crowd that cried for Barabbus. Who did the greater evil? -JohnG

Response:

I’d like to inject a little more thought here about the likelyhood of common cloning.

I’d like you to do that too. I believe it will happen.

Yup. No reason it shouldn’t. Curiousity killed the cat.

Complacency kills far more many cats. Stupidity kills more. Dumb luck wipes out quite a few. Never underestimate the fickle finger of fate. A curious cat that dies exploring, striving to be somthing more than it is today, is really the only one that was ever fully alive in the first place. Life isn’t meant to be lived in a stupor. Explorers and cowards both wind up in the same palce, but the path they took made all the difference. This is a world issue and sooner or later some nut will authorize it or do it.

Only if ‘nut’ is defined as someone who doesn’t agree with you. How enlightened. Fortunately, we are not compelled to do only those things which aren’t "nutty", look at bungee jumping. Remember, countries compete technologically. It’s a prize to be the first, especially when it makes money.

Yes, and? I’m sure there is a way to profit of this.

Geez, profits are always evil? I thought that sometimes people profit because they have done something helpful or useful. There always is. Perhaps some eccentric rich types will be attracted to the concept of his own ‘immortality’.

Lots of people see that in their children today. It’s not always a bad thing. My children will continue a line that’s been unbroken for billions of years. I hope that line continues for billions more. I’ll do everything I can to give them the love, support, education, financial means, and yes, if I can, genetic makeup to make that happen. If I’m carrying a gene that pre-disposes me to cancer, and I can eliminate it from their genotype, I will. It’s none of your business. If I were to choose to have a child who is genetically identical to either myself or my wife, what business is it of yours? It is no more your business than what school I send my children to or whether I buy piano lessons from them. Much like cryogenics.

Is cryonics a bad thing? Why? Do you contend that it can’t work, or do you contend that it may work, but shouldn’t? Why are you so comfortable in declaring how others should live and die? Besides, that’s what they said about test tube babies.

I don’t know what "that" you are speaking of. There have been tens of thousands of in vitro fertilizations since Louise Brown was born back in 1979. As far as I know, they haven’t turned in to brain eating monsters. As far as I know, they are as happy and healthy as any other group of children. It’s terrifying really…

Why? Just because you declare it terrifying, doesn’t mean I have to take your word for it. Now, 16 year olds with driver’s licenses, that’s terrifying! to think that there are no laws for this sort of thing because no one

Why are you so eager to legislate other’s behaviour when you haven’t demonstrated any sort of threat other than your own vague "terror". Lot’s of nice white folks were terrified at the prospect of allowing other people to marry outside of their "race". What is different about your position. You both want to enslave others because of your fears. ever even thought this sort of sci-fi could exist.

Same sort of sci-fi as airplanes, microwave ovens, VCRs, laprascopic sugery, CAT scans, MRIs, preservatives, anitbiotics, blood transfusions, indoor plumbing, etc. If you feel so strongly, I hear that Ted Kazynski’s land up in Montana is available. It’s similar to the mass panic that would be felt if aliens ever do land.

Like the mass panic that happened when Louise Brown was born? Like the same panic that happened when Dolly was announced? Geez, they must have swept those bodies off the street mighty damn fast because I sure didn’t see them (of course, I probably slept in late). What would we do?

Cheer, smile silently at all the technophobes working on their ulcers, and then get back to work. -JohnG

Response:

Well, I guess we can stop right there as you don’t understand correctly. But, since this is USENET, we won’t. Then

Your supposition is false, so the ‘then’ and all that follows is irrelevant. the could take this genetic eggs,

What are genetic eggs? Are there other varieties? from a female,

A good source of eggs. and make a whole human race out of people who were the best of everthing into each human,

From one woman’s eggs? Boy, will she be tired! Therefore eliminating the need for us,

I think I could make a credible case for eliminating you without the super-eggs fromthe tired super-ovulator. (humans of today With either phyical, Mental, Emotional, problems,

Geez, you’re right. Let’s make more fucked up people. In fact, since it is so noble to be inferior, let’s raise the percentage of people with such wonderful things as cystic fibrosis, Down’s syndrome, Tay Sachs, breast cancer, and the rest. No more that one healthy child per household! What a wonderful, enlightened world we would live in then. First, if you want to breed (or engineer) the "perfect" human, cloning is one of the last things you’d want to do. First, it’s hard. Much harder than breeding the old fashioned way. Second, because it is hard, it is expensive. It takes trained people, drugs, moderately high tech instruments and techniques, and quite a bit of time and planning to pull it off. Third, if you are trying to come up with a person who is "superior" to existing people, you can’t start by cloning. You need to find or engineer the genes that provide the traits you are looking for. Then you need to get all of these genes into one person. That’s called selective breeding and is the antithesis of cloning. Fourth, why do you think everyone would converge onto the same idea of "superior"? Sure, a lot of americans would end up selecting for some common physical traits. Why isn’t that their right? We do that today, albeit crudely, by selecting mates who have traits we like. This won’t, however, lead to a world of only one type of person. Different families would place emphasis on different traits and skills. Some would lean towards music or other arts. Others towards the athletic talents. Others towards more rational, scientific thinkers. Some of these traits are very likely to be mutually exclusive. You will never be able to breed a person who is both the best power lifter and the best long distance runner. It is likely that modes of thought are equally exclusive. All of the genetic musical material in the world won’t come to anything without the child raised in a loving, supportive home. What we are likely to end up selecting for are good parenting skills. Let’s turn this question around. Who are you to say that human development should stop here? Why are accidents good, noble, or moral, but conscious, deliberate planning is evil or depraved? Who are you to say that a parent isn’t allowed to make every effort that they can to insure that their children aren’t the happiest, healthiest, best educated, etc. That isn’t just a right, I feel it is a duty. The idea is to crete, the perfect human being, and then make several of them, This people would be, the best of the best, in sports, an extremely high IQ, type of person,

And this is bad because? One person, A Scientist, said, something to the effect, that GOD was smart, but when get this Clones done, they will be smarter, than GOD.

First, you misquote, badly. Second, please, what is "smarter, than GOD" supposed to mean? Since I deny the exsistence of "GOD", the statement is meaningless to me. If you are a believer however, how can you believe anything made of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, and a few trace elements ever amount to anything compared to the supposed infinite creator of the universe? Looks to me like this Scientist, want to do away with us as humans,

Depends on how you look at it. Why should the "people" of 1000 years from now be forced to look, act, and live like we do? Are you saying we are so perfect in all ways that no room for change must ever be allowed? How enlightened of you. We look and act nothing like our ancestors of 100,000+ years ago. In fact, we wouldn’t even consider them fully human. Do you consider our existence at the expense of those long dead ancestors to be evil? If so, please go out and shoot yourself. If not, then why should we view the prospect of future generations that continue to change from what we are today as any more evil? The important thing is that continue to live, and learn, and fall in love, and write songs, and build their culture, and all the thousands of other things that we have been doing for a very long time. Whether our lifespan is 30, 60, or 3000 years won’t change that. Whether our IQ is 30, 100, or 10000 won’t change that. Whether our vocabulary is 3000, 30000, or 30000000 words won’t change that. since we all do not think alike, look alike, act alike, beleive alike.

And we never will. Then they will have what they think is the perfect human, when they clone what they think is the most perfect person,

Anyone who believes in the concept of "the most perfect human" is doomed to be sorely disappointed. Just think, if all of this clones, were attorneys, were accountants, were bankers, or were all of any other profession, what would this world be like?

There would be a temporary glut of attourneys, bankers, etc. They would overpopulate their niche. They would starve and die (or go on welfare) until they came back into balance with what their society needed. Kind of like what loggers are doing in the Pacific Northwest, or what most of the people involved in the care of horses did in the early part of this century. Part of the reason for living on this earth, is the feeling of ones own identity. Their own feelings, their own believes, their own roots.

None of this would change. Please someone else, send what they they beleive will happen if this clones are allowed to be made, of humans, so they will be living, breathing, robots of the human beings.

Ahh, can someone parse this? -JohnG

Response:

Have concern about this CLONING a person, Looking for some good feedback on your feelings, and ideas.

Will We At Tennessee, If I understand correctly, this cloning a person, is to get the best athelete, yesr the most intelligent person,

yesr,smatrs ear impotent to use all and then to remove all the bad genetic codes from a human

will teh LORD put thim jinitec codse thier to mike sur that we dindt klive furivir aand be lik untwo teh LORD , so that the human was perfect, in all ways yesr, Physically, yesr, ispiceaeiylluy psyhciacalliey Mentally, veri smatr Emotionally, lovse teh LORD Then the could take this genetic eggs, from a female, and make a whole human race out of people who were the best of everthing into each human

all jiniteieciattauliy teh same, Therefore eliminating the need for us, (humans of today With either phyical, Mental, Emotional, problems, yesr The idea is to crete, the perfect human being, and then make several of them, to cretin thims This people would be, the best of the best, in sports, an extremely high IQ, type of person,

yesr, lik untwo teh LORD One person, A Scientist, said, something to the effect, that GOD was smart, but when get this Clones done, they will be smarter, than GOD.

yesr, smatretrts thin teh LORD, thits wot he sid, i seeeeed hims last nithgt on teh TV takin to Ted Couple. He sid so. Looks to me like this Scientist, want to do away with us as humans, since we all do not think alike, look alike, act alike, beleive alike.

he beeeleeves in teh LORD thits wot he sid, sos i beeeeleeev hes doin god Then they will have what they think is the perfect human, when they clone what they think is the most perfect person, like untwo teh LORD Just think, if all of this clones, were attorneys, were accountants, were bankers, or were all of any other profession, what would this world be like?

teh will be preechers and theierere wifes. it wil be god Part of the reason for living on this earth, is the feeling of ones own identity

Identuty dont mater. Burth ciaetrifaeicaetes dont mater Only teh LORD maters, and these gut is on teh LORD’s sid, he sid sow. . Their own feelings, their own believes, their own roots. dont mater, omly teh LORD maters Please someone else, send what they they beleive will happen if this clones are allowed to be made, of humans, so they will be living, breathing, robots of the human beings.

Ite will be fein, beecausee tehy will al beeleeve in teh LORD. Waht does this meen , these thing yuo uses so much , these ,,,,,, yer frend barry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -WillWeat, from TN,

Response:

Anne wrote a critique on my post based on thinking that cloning is actually "In Vitro fertilization". But its not, because that involves a father’s and mother’s DNA being combined. Anne please get your facts straight. (1) WEBSTER’S: Clone – "The aggregate of the asexually produced progeny of an individual" (2) The genetic DNA material is solely that of one parent. That is, it is not combined with another either of the same sex or opposite sex. (3) Dolly the sheep was made like this: - Ewe #1 had a single cell removed from its body - Ewe #2 had its DNA removed from an egg cell and the DNA discarded - Ewe #1’s cell is placed next to the #2 egg cell (less its DNA) - Electric pulses are used to force the cells to fuse and to make the fused cell "think" fertilization has occurred - The fertilized egg is placed in the womb of Ewe #3 - Ewe #3 eventually gives birth - The offspring is genetically identical in every respect to Ewe #1 DNA from Ewe #2 and #3 have nothing to do with the genetic outcome, or its negligible. Throughout this process the only DNA is that of Ewe #1. Now "sexual" fertilization occurs when the DNA from male and female combine. Asexual fertilization, uses only one DNA strand from one and only one "parent". Thus the offspring is nearly a perfect twin of the "parent", albeit not born at the same instant of time. (4) Some asexual reproduction (cloning) occurs in some species of life in nature. That is, self-fertilization occurs. The offspring is and identical twin. Anne, your critique of my post would put me to shame if your knowledge was correct. However, when you fully understand what a clone is, go back an re-read my post. It may then make sense to you. Keep in mind some sarcasm is intended on my part.

Response:

Anne, What a great idea. One of me to be a librarian, and one of me to be mother to the Empress, and one of me to be Bob’s wife, and one of me to read and one to get the house clean. BTW the Empress Elizabeth Man Jie now can say the word "NO" and says it often, she has learned the toddler laws of property, best summarized as: "It’s MINE, it’s MINE, it’s MINE!" pays loving attention to her baby doll, pets the cats, and kisses them on the top of their heads, and seems to be learning about ten new words a day, loves _Where the Wild Things Are_ because she can growl, and clearly is going to become a mountain climber. Her favorite activity is to climb Mt. Babba–Babba being Chinese for daddy, because when she manages to stand on his shoulders, she gets flipped down in a sommersault. We have taught her to respond to the question: "How old are you?" with the response "I’m two." She hasn’t learned yet to hold out 2 fingers, instead she gives a "Heil Hitler" salute.

Response:

IRONY: If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister?

It’s her daughter. Not herself, not her twin sister. The baby would have had a different environment from the womb onward. It would have been made with her own eggs (albeit slightly modified!). How could it be her twin? On the other hand, if her mother had had two eggs implanted instead of one, it could have been her twin, though obviously not her identical twin. If cloning were to become common, presumably unlikely, and there was a need to distinguish such kids from non-cloned ones, we’d probably come up with a politically correct term like ‘identical daughter.’ In fact, with new reproductive technologies, we might need terms — from a child’s point of view — for 1. solo genetic-mother, solo genetic father: (child grew from genetic material of this person; ‘identical mother’ or ‘identical father’ also okay.) 2. egg-mother, sperm-father: (child grew from egg & sperm of these people, is not cloned; ‘genetic mother,’ ‘genetic father,’ birth-father’ also okay) 3. womb-mother, (child grew in this woman’s womb; ‘birth-mother’ also okay, but usually also includes genetic-motherhood) 4. legal mother, legal father (legal parent(s) of child) 5. house-mother, house-father (child is raised by this parent(s)) 6. step-mother, step-father (spouse of remarried legal parent. Can by extension be used for spouse of remarried any-parent.) 7. foster-parent (house-parent without legal parent status) 8. adoptive parent (legal parent without genetic parent or womb-mother status) Of course, a child could have several parents in categories 4-8 — or none at all. "SIN?" Also, will this be defacto incest? I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking.

She didn’t mate, though…that’s the point. Incidentally, a man could also, in theory, be cloned. MORE EMOTIONAL HARM: How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father? I know I for one would feel like a "freak". And no doubt, youthful peers who found me out would all call me "freak’.

You’d only feel a freak if it was unusual…like kids of divorce, or incubator babies, or adoptees used to feel. Otherwise it would be like, hey, I’m *just* like my Mom. Of course, I think it’ll make for fireworks growing up — I think most of us parents would go bananas trying to raise someone exactly like us. I think if I had (and I wouldn’t!) such a daughter, I’d get her Dad to do more of the raising. Maybe clone-kids *shouldn’t* be raised by their identical parents! Yes folks, Dr. Frankenstein is on the scene.

Naah. People always get scared of new technologies, and then in a few years, they’re old hat. Not that I recommend human cloning, I just think its social impact will be trivial. Rupa

Response:

If cloning were to become common, presumably unlikely, and there was a

I’d like to inject a little more thought here about the likelyhood of common cloning. I believe it will happen. Curiousity killed the cat. This is a world issue and sooner or later some nut will authorize it or do it. Remember, countries compete technologically. It’s a prize to be the first, especially when it makes money. I’m sure there is a way to profit of this. There always is. Perhaps some eccentric rich types will be attracted to the concept of his own ‘immortality’. Much like cryogenics. Besides, that’s what they said about test tube babies. It’s terrifying really… to think that there are no laws for this sort of thing because no one ever even thought this sort of sci-fi could exist. It’s similar to the mass panic that would be felt if aliens ever do land. What would we do?

Response:

Walt, that’s a great idea! Also very amusing. IRONY: If a woman gives birth to say a girl and the girl is her clone (identical in virtually every respect) is the woman who gives birth the mother of this child or her twin-sister?

The child and the woman who births the child are genetic clones, not twins. MZ Twins are conceived at the same time, the fertilized egg splits at the same time, and twins are generally born within minutes or hours of each other (although there are a handful of cases in which twins were born months apart). (An aside: The question of which twin is older is really incorrectly put, as MZ twins are equally ‘old’ — one twin may be born before the other, but their age from conception is exactly the same.) Again, a clone is a clone, not a twin, even though MZ twins are nature’s clones. But a cloned person can’t be called a twin. EMOTIONAL HARM: You know its bad enough for adoptees that they face certain emotional consequences for being given up by one or both birth parents and now there is the possibility that some girl may grow up wondering if the woman that gave birth to her is her mother or her twin-sister?

I don’t think that would be as big a problem as having to experience in reality what some daughters dread: BECOMING MOM. Also, there would be (I’d think) incredible identity issues. Is Mom, Jr. a person in her own right, or is she just a clone of Mom? Mom in miniature? Or, like Ripley 8 (Alien Resurrection), just another form of a person you used to be, but aren’t? Huh? "SIN?" Also, will this be defacto incest? I mean the "mother" mated with her own flesh and blood, even in a stronger sense than if a brother and sister committed incest, at least genetically speaking.

No, no mating occurred. The genetic material of an already fertilized egg would produce the clone. This would be reproduction in its true sense, making a copy of something. I could, in effect, give birth to myself. This is not like having sex with my father, as my mother and father already did that (yeah, only three times in their lives, though). I’d be more like a human Xerox machine. MORE EMOTIONAL HARM: How would you like growing up as a kid knowing you never had a biological father? I know I for one would feel like a "freak". And no doubt, youthful peers who found me out would all call me "freak’.

No, no! The clone HAS a biological father! The biological father is whoever fertilized the egg in the first place. So, if I were to have myself cloned, my daughter’s father would be MY father. That would kind of make us sisters, except for the fact that my DNA and her DNA would be identical. So all we could be is clones, scientifically. Socially one could say we were (a) mother and daughter, (b) ’sisters’ of different generations, or (c) clones (once cloning was socially acceptable, we could say something like this: "I have three birth children, three adopted children, a foster child, two step kids, and oh, yes, these are my clones." Yes folks, Dr. Frankenstein is on the scene.

Well, think of the possibilities of re-raising oneself. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate form of narcissism? And revenge? If our clones turned out better than we did, we could thumb our noses at Mom and Dad, proving that we were better parents than they were. And we could let ourselves (er, I mean our clones) do what our parents didn’t let us do the first time around. Think of all the cookies we could vicariously eat in bed. We could space out our clones over the decades so that my great-granddaughter would really be ME, and then we’d all (all who had clones, that is) be immortal. The possibilities are endless, Anne — L. Anne Babb To save energy, do not go out lookin’ for trouble; chances are, it will find you soon enough. (Forrest Gump)

Response:

Author: admin on
Category: Accountants
Tags: Accountants

Accounting Talk

Vitamin D Deficiency

Question:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

Carty: Security measures are "nuts"

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

Virgin- Perth International Terminal

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

I tried to buy a restaurant but the tenant wont let me buy it…. can anybody help or give me some tips?

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

Plan to encourage defections failing

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

A-340

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response: