hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Emily


well it will be easy to for me to remember the
month/day-- year will be rough....

Hum.... I will have to point this out to the guys at
work today, as they always call me-- mother nature --
as in don't mess with me. Guessing I am only a few
billion years from being her! <lol>

Donna

--- A A HODGES <hodgesaa@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Well there ya go. I'll have to remember the date of
> creation. That's
> fascinating stuff......................;O
> 
> Andrea H
> Beaufort, SC 
> 
> 
> > [Original Message]
> > From: james singer <islandjim1@verizon.net>
> > To: <gardenchat@hort.net>
> > Date: 7/13/2005 5:51:34 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CHAT] Emily
> >
> > I bought a house once that was built at the turn
> of the last century. I  
> > found two items in the attic--a small copper still
> and a bible. Sold  
> > the still; still have the bible. It's a big bulky
> thing for which some  
> > "scholar" had compiled a concordance that is
> printed in the margins.  
> > Same scholar, I suppose, also assigned dates to
> events. Did you know,  
> > for example, the the earth was created on
> September 22, 4004 BC? I  
> > thought not; modern education ignores many of
> these important facts.
> >
> >
> > On Jul 12, 2005, at 9:23 PM, A A HODGES wrote:
> >
> > > 40%??? That's alarming.
> > >
> > > I had to teach a class on dinosaurs my first
> year out of college at the
> > > museum I worked for. I had a Christian academy
> class come in one day.  
> > > They
> > > brought their texts with them, and I soon found
> out that the only  
> > > reason
> > > they came to the class was to argue their point
> that dinosaurs and man
> > > "walked the earth together." Their text actually
> depicted a photograph  
> > > on a
> > > dinosaur fossil and a fossilized "caveman"
> footprint in the same  
> > > picture,
> > > thus proving that they lived at the same time
> according to the text.  
> > > It was
> > > disconcerting to say the least, and of course I
> was only 22 at the  
> > > time and
> > > had no idea how to respond with offending
> someone. Now, I am NOT  
> > > slamming
> > > the Christian religion, so no one start getting
> upset please, but that  
> > > was
> > > way over the top. It amazed and appalled me what
> those children were  
> > > being
> > > taught.
> > >
> > > Andrea H
> > > Beaufort, SC
> > >
> > >
> > >> [Original Message]
> > >> From: David Franzman <dfranzma@pacbell.net>
> > >> To: <gardenchat@hort.net>
> > >> Date: 7/12/2005 8:59:01 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: [CHAT] Emily
> > >>
> > >> Hey Jim
> > >>
> > >> Interesting and goes along with my thoughts. 
> One word on what you  
> > >> wrote
> > >> about evolution:  National Geographic had an
> interesting article on
> > >> evolution and Darwin's journeys.  The author
> lamented that the title  
> > >> of
> > > that
> > >> breakthrough scientific work was labeled "The
> Theory of Evolution."   
> > >> This
> > >> gave the naysayers wiggle room  to denigrate it
> as merely a
> > > theory...meaning
> > >> just an idea rather than a firm scientific
> basis for the study of life
> > >> science.  Also, and I think I wrote about this
> a few months ago, most
> > >> shocking of all was that more than 40% of the
> American people do not  
> > >> buy
> > > the
> > >> theory.  A significant number believe that the
> age of the  
> > >> earth/universe
> > > can
> > >> be counted in thousands not billions of years.
> > >>
> > >> David
> > >> http://www.atouchofthetropics.net
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "james singer" <islandjim1@verizon.net>
> > >> To: <gardenchat@hort.net>
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 4:52 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: [CHAT] Emily
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> This may sound like I'm running for office,
> David, but I think it's
> > > both.
> > >>> In the short term, I think it's the cyclical
> crap shoot that weather
> > > has
> > >>> always seemed to be--the stuff of the Farmer's
> Almanac. But I think
> > > this
> > >>> is playing out on top of significant long-term
> change. A key factor  
> > >>> in
> > >>> What's-His-Name Grey's, the hurricane guru at
> University of Colorado,
> > >>> prognostications is El Nino--and the
> occurrence, recurrence of El  
> > >>> Nino
> > >>> seems to be influenced by the continual
> warming of the earth.
> > >>>
> > >>> The scary part is that these effects are
> cumulative. The worst of  
> > >>> what
> > > you
> > >>> see today will be the best you can hope for
> tomorrow. It took a  
> > >>> couple
> > > of
> > >>> hundred years of reckless fossil-fuel
> emissions to get us here--to  
> > >>> the
> > >>> front edge of reaping our harvest; it will
> surely take that long a
> > > period
> > >>> of constrained stewardship to get us back to a
> less hazardous
> > > environment,
> > >>> or even to one where we can maintain an
> environmental status quo.
> > >>>
> > >>> David, the problem with "theories" is a
> rhetorical one. Two come to
> > >>> mind--evolution and global warming. They are
> theories because they  
> > >>> have
> > >>> not been definitively proven beyond all doubt.
> Most intelligent  
> > >>> people
> > >>> understand that caveat; most intelligent
> people also believe the
> > > theories
> > >>> are true or very close to true. The only
> significant deniers are the
> > >>> Kansas state school board and the current
> administration in  
> > >>> Washington.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Jul 12, 2005, at 6:58 PM, David Franzman
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> So Jim I think you and I agree about this
> greenhouse effect thing.
> > >>>> Everybody expects instant changes and when we
> have one hot period  
> > >>>> some
> > >>>> are claiming that it's because of the gh
> effect.  You and I both  
> > >>>> know
> > > it
> > >>>> takes more than just one season to prove or
> disprove a theory.
> > > However,
> > >>>> I wanted to ask you about last year and this
> years hurricanes.   
> > >>>> We're
> > > off
> > >>>> to the fastest start since recorded history. 
> Last year was a huge
> > > year
> > >>>> with a friend of mine in Gainesville being
> whacked three times.
> > > Weather
> 
=== message truncated ===

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT



Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index



 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement