[Terry Given]

Winfield Hill wrote:




I just got the impression that those fishes were two males, living in a
rather small aquarium, not able to live a natural life. It didn't sound
like a natural life for them. I just could not imagine myself enjoying
their
dance knowing that they would probably be happier around a coral reef
or wherever such fishes usually live.




I have known several dogs and many cats during my life, especially when
I was young and my family had both dogs and cats, and I feel very
differently about dogs and cats.

Dogs are not suitable as pets, they cannot live naturally, they cannot
run around in flocks and hunt animals. The dogs I have known would
definitely have been happier in the wild. Not because they were
unhappy in any way, for being pets, they were so adapted to my family
that they thought they were humans and family members just as the
others in the family. But it is just so obvious that it is a very
unnatural life for a dog.

Cats are very different from all other pets. I get the impression that
cats choose to live with humans because they like it.
You cannot order a cat around, it lives with us voluntarily.

It is often a good life for them, if they are free to go out into the
nature whenever they like. If they don't like one home they often find
another family and another home to live in. That happens now and then
in the country.

Cats have several times followed me from a nearby village to my
house in the forest, checking me out as a possible alternative human
to live with.
I was friendly to them and gave them water but did not allow them to
sleep over in the house because I didn't have time for cats.

A friend of mine came to NZ as a post-doc researcher from CA. She
brought her cat with her (after quarantine) - it had been de-clawed, was
10 years old and had *NEVER* been outside. Now that is cruel.

About 2 months after getting its freedom, it started catching and
devouring birds, sans claws. A determined cat. When she went back to the
US the cat became an inside cat once more, and apparently was *not*
happy about it.

When I used to live in the South End of Boston, I used to regularly see
gay guys walking huge dogs - rotties etc - in the park near worcester
square. How cruel, to keep a dog like that in a 5-storey brownstone.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Mike Monett]

http://www.first-to-fly.com/History/History of Airplane/Whitehead.ht> m

These are the first two web pages I have seen which try to refute the
pro-Whitehead web sites, and don't think they succeed at all. There are
several historical facts which are difficult to refute.

The first link here is what convinced me, but there are many web pages
about Whitehead you can check out before you make your final judgement.

http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/wff/wff1.asp

Read the article From The Bridgeport Herald, August 18, 1901,
written by an eyewitness reporter from this newspaper and published
four days after the event.

By the way, some anti-Whitehead people have tried to discredit this
article saying it was strange that the article was not published the
same day but four days later. But The Bridgeport Herald was a wekly
newspaper, so the article was published in the first issue after the
event. Nothing strange about that.

http://www.thehistorynet.com/ahi/blgwhitehead/index3.html
http://www.deepsky.com/~firstflight/Pages/article.html
http://www.weisskopf.de/history.htm
http://www.weisskopf.de/museume.htm
http://historynet.com/ahi/blgwhitehead/index.html
http://www.unmuseum.org/gustave.htm
http://www.gatm.com/whitehead/
http://www.deepsky.com/~firstflight/Pages/article8.html

After studying the material from both sides on this issue I am sure you
will come to the same conclusion as many before you, Whitehead had a
working powered aeroplane with enough control of its flight to go where
he wanted to go.
He used it many times, more than two years before the 1903 first
flight by the Wright brothers.

And his plane nr 21 did not land with a crash as so many others,
including the Wright brothers plane in 1903. Whitehead's plane landed
softly and cleanly on both land and water and could start anew and fly
back to the place it started from.

Roger J.

That's a dream. I have been a pilot since 1959, and have 750 hours in my
own Piper Malibu. The accounts of Whitehead's flights are fantasy. He had
no control over the airplane. Leaning to avoid trees is not going to
work. He did not have powerful enough engines to lift the weight. There
was supposed to be two engines - one to drive the wheels. That is a silly
idea. It merely increases the weight he had to lift. Claiming the first
flight was tethered is insane. The plane would have crashed. He
contradicts himself on the means of directional control.

There are photos of him in a glider. If he actually flew, he certainly
would have photos taken. His claim that he was going too fast for any
camera are bogus.

His claims are simply gross exaggerations to try to get investors.

Mike Monett

 

[Roger Johansson]

When she went back to the US the cat became an inside cat once more,
and apparently was not happy about it.

When I used to live in the South End of Boston, I used to regularly
see gay guys walking huge dogs - rotties etc - in the park near
worcester square. How cruel, to keep a dog like that in a 5-storey
brownstone.

I agree completely. To have dogs and cats in a city is very unnatural.

I was talking about a situation out in the countryside, and in most of
the third world, where cats are very free to choose for themselves if
they want to come home again, chose a new home, or go wild.

The ancient stories we have about how the cat historically started
living with humans seem to support that cats, at least to some extent,
have chosen human company voluntarily.

 

[Daniel Haude]

On 3 Apr 2005 04:53:37 -0700,

First Terry, then the Pope, and then our great fish. It was more
than I could handle yesterday. Watching "The Big Fish" on HBO in
the evening and crying at the end played a role as well. Sheesh!

Now, just to concentrate a bit on power MOSFET characteristics.

The good news is that Clown Loaches are much like Popes: If one dies, you
can just get a new one.

--D.

 

[Mike Monett]

Don Pearce wrote:

[...]

None of this matters. The first heavier than air powered flight was
achieved by John Stringfellow in the 1800s.

d

LOL! A model running along a wire. No directional control, and no pilot.
Here's a description:

"Some visitors noticed that by the middle of the run, the machine was
lifting the wire, as if it were straining to fly on its own."

http://www.thehistorynet.com/ahi/blvictoriandream/index2.html

Good shot, Don. Fooled a lot of people, including me!

Mike Monett

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Roger Johansson

I agree completely. To have dogs and cats in a city is very unnatural.

To have PEOPLE in a city is very unnatural! Living things adapt, given
long enough.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Daniel Haude
<[email protected]>) about 'Twilight for
the fishes, we say goodby to our great Clown Loach.', on Mon, 4 Apr
2005:

On 3 Apr 2005 04:53:37 -0700,


The good news is that Clown Loaches are much like Popes: If one dies, you
can just get a new one.

Yes, but the new one is not the same as your former piscine (or papal)
friend. Maybe you never kept dogs?

 

[Don Pearce]

That's a dream. I have been a pilot since 1959, and have 750 hours in my
own Piper Malibu. The accounts of Whitehead's flights are fantasy. He had
no control over the airplane. Leaning to avoid trees is not going to
work. He did not have powerful enough engines to lift the weight. There
was supposed to be two engines - one to drive the wheels. That is a silly
idea. It merely increases the weight he had to lift. Claiming the first
flight was tethered is insane. The plane would have crashed. He
contradicts himself on the means of directional control.

There are photos of him in a glider. If he actually flew, he certainly
would have photos taken. His claim that he was going too fast for any
camera are bogus.

His claims are simply gross exaggerations to try to get investors.

Mike Monett

None of this matters. The first heavier than air powered flight was
achieved by John Stringfellow in the 1800s.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

 

[Don Pearce]

Don Pearce wrote:

[...]

None of this matters. The first heavier than air powered flight was
achieved by John Stringfellow in the 1800s.

d

LOL! A model running along a wire. No directional control, and no pilot.
Here's a description:

"Some visitors noticed that by the middle of the run, the machine was
lifting the wire, as if it were straining to fly on its own."

http://www.thehistorynet.com/ahi/blvictoriandream/index2.html

Good shot, Don. Fooled a lot of people, including me!

Mike Monett

But just think about all planes flying this way. You couldn't get
lost, and even if your engine failed, you wouldn't crash. The Wright
brothers made a big mistake allowing pilots to fly around on their own
whim.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Don Pearce <[email protected]>

But just think about all planes flying this way. You couldn't get lost,
and even if your engine failed, you wouldn't crash. The Wright brothers
made a big mistake allowing pilots to fly around on their own whim.

Use two suspension cables, so that they could be electric-powered. Save
carrying tons of fuel about!

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Roger Johansson


To have PEOPLE in a city is very unnatural! Living things adapt, given
long enough.

Old fashioned zoos as still found in the 3rd world are pretty hard on
the animals. You see behavior that appears to indicate psychological
problems, such as big jungle cats pacing back and forth continously,
even after years. Let's not even get into disturbing primate behavior
in captivity. Of course humans sometimes act pretty oddly in similar
situations.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[John Fields]

Cats have several times followed me from a nearby village to my
house in the forest, checking me out as a possible alternative human
to live with.
I was friendly to them and gave them water but did not allow them to
sleep over in the house because I didn't have time for cats.

---
What a shame.

It's a great honor for a free cat to consider you worthy of providing
it with a home, and if you refused the company then you're a sad
little man.

 

[Winfield Hill]

Spehro Pefhany wrote...

Of course humans sometimes act pretty oddly in similar situations.

We've seen some continuous pacing back and forth here on s.e.d.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Spehro Pefhany

Old fashioned zoos as still found in the 3rd world are pretty hard on
the animals. You see behavior that appears to indicate psychological
problems, such as big jungle cats pacing back and forth continously,
even after years.

I saw that in the Berlin Zoo not so many years ago, and I had previously
thought that it was one of the better ones.

Let's not even get into disturbing primate behavior in captivity. Of
course humans sometimes act pretty oddly in similar situations.

Humans don't even need the excuse of captivity. (;-)

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Fields

It's a great honor for a free cat to consider you worthy of providing
it with a home, and if you refused the company then you're a sad little
man.

He said he didn't have time, which is also my reason for not having a
pet. I go away on business, too, and it's an imposition to ask other
people to look after your pets.

 

[John Fields]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Fields


He said he didn't have time, which is also my reason for not having a
pet. I go away on business, too, and it's an imposition to ask other
people to look after your pets.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Spehro Pefhany wrote...

We've seen some continuous pacing back and forth here on s.e.d.

Tantrums, throwing of feces, public masturbation, etc.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[Daniel Haude]

On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:22:14 +0100,

Yes, but the new one is not the same as your former piscine (or papal)
friend. Maybe you never kept dogs?

Birds. Same thing. They have a personality. They grow on you, they die,
you mourn, you get a new one (or eventually stop). Just like Popes. --D.

 

[Active8]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Roger Johansson


To have PEOPLE in a city is very unnatural! Living things adapt, given
long enough.

Yup. Animals adapt. The weird thing is that domesticated animals are
so genetically different from their wild cousins that it's a mystery
how they evolved or how they could have been domesticated by man.
Same thing goes for the differences between wild grasses and grains
and the kind we use for food. The wild variety had small, hard seeds
that you could hardly pick up unless they stuck to your finger and
the raiches were brittle. That's so that when the seed matures, the
wind can blow it off. You can't harvest that. Domesticates grains
are larger and have a softer shell. The raiches are more durable so
that when the seed matures, it doesn't fall off. You have to beat it
off (aw, hell -- I'll leave that in for a comedy sub-thread )

 

[Active8]

---
What a shame.

It's a great honor for a free cat to consider you worthy of providing
it with a home, and if you refused the company then you're a sad
little man.

It will also thank you. I used to put milk out for one that hung
around my place. One day it brought me a mouse If not for
travelling around to work and not knowing if it had an owner, I
might have kept it. The previous tennants were Indian and bought
rice by the barrel. I caught 21 mice the first night (lay down,
almost asleep, "snap!" ) and 17 the next night. I kept tally on a
door frame by the stove where I placed the trap - the painter pissed
me off so I ran him off before he could finish.