BS: Maybe LH is right?

Subject: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: MMario
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 04:01 PM

upcoming special from Shatner

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 04:03 PM

I've seen the show... it was crap

There's a science show hosted by Alan Alda that Nova runs occasionally that is MUCH better.. I cannot recall the name off hand....

I do recall there's already a thread on this subject, so maybe someone could close this one...

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 04:06 PM

If Alan Alda was any more slippery sounding, he could be used to grease skillets.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Kaleea
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 05:18 PM

It was'nt shat--it was Gene Roddenberry & Star Trek.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 05:50 PM

It is true that a lot of the future technology from Star Trek, especially the original series, now looks familiar, or even chunky and old fashioned. (Even space warps and hyperspace aren't that far out of reach, it appears.)

We ain't got transporters or replicators yet though.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 05:57 PM

I would just love to have a replicator. And a transporter. But specially a replicator.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 06:05 PM

awww. Arthur C. Clarke did 27 times more than Shatner...as Kaleea says, it was Gene Roddenberry who drove the feel of the show...

(I also know that writers like Jerry Sohl, Norman Spinrad and Harlan Ellison tried writing for it early, but were not exactly pleased at the way the series went for mass appeal, rather than good Sc-Fi.....I guess I'm not surprised, as the producers and the network DID want to make money)

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: DougR
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:07 PM

Is L.H. ever wrong? Perish the thought! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:11 PM

Replicators would be free. After you make the first one...

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Peace
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:19 PM

You can say that again.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:23 PM

Replicators would be free. After you make the first one...

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:25 PM

Amost never, Doug, almost never... (grin)

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Cluin
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:37 PM

Replicators would be free. After you make the first one...




Hey, you're right!

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 07:53 PM

They'd find some way to prevent that, and impose some kind of copyright restriuctions, the same way they do with digital media and music.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Cluin
Date: 07 Mar 06 - 08:02 PM

And I'm sure they would prove just as ineffective.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Ernest
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 05:09 AM

What if replicators run with nuclear energy?

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 05:29 AM

Arthur C.Clarke did nothing tangible, neiher has William Shatner. Scientists did it!

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 06:31 AM

Not being "tangible" doesn't mean insignificant..

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 09:59 AM

OK, switch the words around then McGrath, my implied meaning remains.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 10:18 AM

Scientific American Frontiers with Alan Alda is a very nice program. He always is charged and enjoys learning new things. How can you dislike that?

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 11:14 AM

I'm sorry, guys. Little Hawk does not do "right". He is working on enlightenment, and has learned long since that concerns about "right" and "wrong" are not the Way. This, in turn, enables him to show others that he is deeply and truly right, being free of such concerns, and others not on the Path equally deeply and truly wrong, because they are concerned about such things. :>) Thus, the Way is also not the Way. Chop wood ansd draw water, Little Hawk.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 12:55 PM

That's for the link SRS!! That's the show I was trying to remember!

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 02:02 PM

Amos, I am as keenly aware of my own fallibillity as I am of yours. As for my concerns, they are fairly prosaic most of the time. I am concerned about money, aging, health, that sort of thing...same as most other people are.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 02:16 PM

You're completely fucked up in any number of ways Hawk. Anyone who likes Major Tom the psychotic astronaut and fails to dig Cheech is a stupid mamalucca beyond any hope of redemption and possessing no redeeming social value on any level.

Best of luck, but in your case it is probably best if you just give up..............

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 02:36 PM

Oh, LH, you claiming to be normal is like a peacock putting up a huge spread of bright blue and green feathers with "I am a pigeon" written on them!! LOL


A

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 04:08 PM

I don't claim to be normal, Amos, I claim to have normal concerns...

Spaw, Cheech is rude and tasteless. He sucks bigtime. He smells too, like something that died about a month ago. The one thing he always desperately needed, aside from being drawn and quartered and then pissed on, was one gigantic kick in the balls with a very large foot.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 04:18 PM

Cheech Marin isn't what his character in films was, you are a sophisticated enough consumer of film to understand that, if you think about it. He has done some remarkable work in his day in the field of collecting and celebrating Chicano art. Just so you know.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 08:30 PM

Well SRS, ya' can't tell the players without a scorecard.......We are discussing the merits of a different "Cheech" .....Cheech Wizard by Vaughn Bode .... (;<))

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 08 Mar 06 - 09:58 PM

Well there you go. Thanks for the link.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Mar 06 - 12:10 PM

Perish the thought that I would EVER speak that way about Cheech Marin, Stilly! ;-D

It was the vile, despicable, egomaniacal, corrupt, arrogant, vulgar, and totally disgusting Cheech Wizard I was referring to. He is some kind of unidentifiable lifeform whose upper body is always covered by a large hat, so his face and arms have never been seen, not even during sex! His only concerns are screwing nubile human females who look like girls from Frank Frazetta's "barbarian" art, boasting about how great he is, wandering around acting cool, and issuing orders to bemused underlings who are foolish enough to think he IS cool.

He is a total fuckhead, devoid of any character or likeability.

I suspect, in fact, that he is the very image of what Vaugn Bode, the deceased wretch who wrote the strip, wished to be like himself in real life, but couldn't quite manage. Accordingly, he offed himself one day, thus bringing an end to a comic strip of little or no merit.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Mar 06 - 04:13 AM

Did you ever see Ralph Bakshi's "Wizards"?

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Mar 06 - 11:46 AM

Yes. So-so. It had its moments. I was not too impressed by "Fritz the Cat", however. Most of that late 60's, early 70's "freak" cartoon and comic stuff was badly compromised by a certain level of gross crudity, combined with a sublime certainty of the innate moral superiority of "freaks" over "straights"....on the part of some very foolish, lazy, irresponsible, and self-indulgent people who appeared to have not the slightest notion that they would one day themselves grow old.

Subject: RE: BS: Maybe LH is right?
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Mar 06 - 02:57 PM

But that's a valid enough viewpoint in itself and quite representative of the times they lived in. We may not have to live with the threat of a nuclear war hanging over our heads everu second of our lives anymore, but people are generally more pessimistic about the future these days for other reasons.