>From: Mike Lorrey <email@example.com>
>Subject: Re: the waves of immigration that now plague this nation
>Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 10:41:37 -0400
>Randy Smith wrote:
> > >From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > >
> > >Ahemmm! I think I will speak to this question.
> > >
> > >I believe that I am a 12th generation American citizen (those on
> > >the list who can trump that (native Americans excepted) please
> > >feel free to do so). Rafal, would I believe, be considered a
> > >0th generation American. Yet I find myself siding more with
> > >Rafal than with Randy.
> > >
> > This issue has NOTHING to do with genealogy! It has to do with long term
>future of this country, and the short term future of our wallets.
> > As for myself, I have American ancestors going back to ~ 12000 BP.
> > And, as someone else pointed out, West European genes have been found in
>very very old Americans, and they probably were here in America around
>Actually, someone said that there were caucasians here before the
>present 'natives' arrived ~9000 years ago. Caucasians are not western
>european in origin, they originate from the Altai/Caucasus/Baikal region
>of central asia, and only migrated west (and east to NA, it seems) due
>to pressure from a mongoloid expansion from China and SE asia. Said
>North American caucasians had more in common with the aboriginal Ainu
>people of the Japanese island of Hokkaido than with those that wound up
That is not what the evidence says: Haplotype X is found only in *England*
these days. No trace of it anywhere else--except in Amerinds!
So therefore it is extremely unlikely that Haplotype X migrated east from
anywhere. It almost certainly migrated west from Western Europe, probably
Also, there is the excellent Solutrean evidence, a la the (1) Clovis points,
and (2) the red ochre caches, and at least several other very close
similarities. Dissenters say there is no evidence that Solutreans had
boats. Well, none that we have found, anyway. But other cultures had boats
before that time, and those cultures were arguably less advanced than the
Solutreans, in several known aspects, etc. It's all on the Net. Well known
and well published distinguished academics created this theory....
> > >The "Extropian Game" is *NOT* "horde the wealth". The Extropian
> > >Game is to spin the wheel and promote complexification.
> > The Extropy game is *supposed* to be about keeping our precious brain
>matter from the ravages of Entropy....
>"Live free or die, death is not the worst of evils"
Your ar wrong. Death is the paramount evil. All else is religion, of some
>While living forever is an extropic ethic, it is not only not the only
>ethic, it is not necessarily the highest one. Individual liberty and
>self determination / self improvement are the higher individual extropic
>ethics. Living forever is merely one option an individual extropian may
> > >Randy's
> > >points are ill-suited for the Extropian list unless he makes a
> > >clear and falsifiable arugment that the admission of "educated"
> > >immigrants over "uneducated" immigrants will clearly promote
> > >a greater rate of complexification.
> > When you cross the street and see a bus bearing down on you, do you
>postpone running until an "clear and falsifiable argument" is presented
>that the bus will run you down unless you hustle your butt to the sidewalk?
>Not quite the right analogy. More like: When you see a bus run down one
>of your associates in the streets, and the driver says "You are next!",
>do you postpone running/shooting out the wheels/EMPing the engine until
>you have a clear, falsifiable, and independently verifiable argument
>that the driver actually meant to do what he did and really means to do
>the same to you?
>The above analogy applies more to the present terrorist situation,
>though. On immigration in general, it is more a matter of a ship at sea,
>rescuing people who are abandoning sinking ships. You could rescue
>everybody, but that would capsize your own ship and then nobody would
>have anyplace to turn. Each individual floating in the sea obviously
>thinks it is perfectly reasonable and fair that the ship can surely
>accomodate just one more person (them, of course) and that they don't
>mean any harm to anybody.
>Now, while you are floating around rescuing people, you have the people
>already on board furiously working to build the hull to have larger
>displacement capacity, larger water processing capacity, and more food,
>decking, cabin space, etc. You obviously want to keep the rate of new
>construction ahead of the rate of rescuing, so you don't fall behind and
>have to start functioning on a more scarce economy for each individual.
>The problem is that some of the people you are rescuing are coming from
>ships that sank because those people either neglected the maintenance of
>their ship, were unable to do so, or had a hand in its destruction, and
>when they arrive on board your ship, they either contribute nothing to
>the expansion of your ship's capacity while soaking up resources, or
>they contribute less than they consume, or they take an active role in
>destroying the capacity of the ship.
>How do you determine who is going to be a positive contributing member
>of the crew and who is going to be a detriment? Do you just let
>everybody on board and hope for the best, or do you impose filters that
>try to determine how each individual is going to behave and check on the
>actions of those new crewmembers until you are satisfied they are
>positive contributors, while deporting those who don't fit your filters,
>and those who turn out to have misrepresented themselves?
They will call you cruel or cold, but we all do this every day, in so very
many aspects of life. They need to be real. The fact is that the
immigration "debate" has been so propagandized that when it comes to this
issue, that almost all Americans, and many citizens of other western
democracies, cannot find their logical ass with both hands.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:14 MDT