This a traditional letter column.
You are encouraged to write a letter of comment on anything that you
find worthy of comment. It will (may) be published in this column along
with my reply. As editor I reserve the right to delete material;
however I will not alter the undeleted material. E-mail to me that solely
references the contents of this site will be assumed to be publishable
mail. All other e-mail is assumed to be private. And, of course, anything
marked not for publication is not for publication. Oh yes, letters of
appreciation for the scholarly resources provided by this site will be
handled very discreetly. This page contains the correspondence for
May 2004.
Some of it is a little ancient; I’m slowly catching up – very slowly.
From: Jane Austin Bruckner
Want to know more about this Jane Austin. What were her parents names
and were they related to the Massachusetts or Virginia Austin’s.
Was she ever married? Did she have children? Who published her works ?
Her parents were named Abraham and Rebecca Austin. They claimed to have
been related to the Virginia Austins; however the connection has never
been substantiated. She was never married, but did have one daughter,
Katherine Austin.
Her publishers were varied. Two of her works were published by
private subscription. The bulk were split equally between Rand McNally
and Peter Fenelon Collier, with the exception of Raiders of the Purple
Sage, which was published by Harlequin Romances. As noted in
the bibliography, her short fiction was published in The Saturday
Evening Post, and in The Tattler. Her autobiography, The Yellow
Rose of Texas, was published by the Texas State Historical Society.
Y’r ob’d etc etc,
From: Peter Neilson
My Dear Mr. Harter!
This beer has a number of problems, most of which are
documented at snopes.com. You’ll find an amazingly
plump version of the story at
http://www.iis.com.br/~cat/infoetc/390.htm
… continued on next rocks …
(Old vaudeville schtick)
From: Michel Durinx
I had written:
So it’s not a vampire, but a zombie. And it drives some people to
death, I cannot imagine how — some reader will remember.
From: rrippe
I need your opinion. Call me asap.
From: Anne Conkling
Sir: would e mail be forwarded to Mr. Harter?
… contintued on next rock …
Good day…I want to compliment you on your thoughts, words, work,
philosophy, search, poetry, and style. I found your site quite by accident
(though I know there are no accidents in this life), and have been
delightedly quoting your work ever since. Are your books sold in VA? Do you
sell direct? Are there ISBN numbers I need to know? How long have you been
writing?
From: Mark A Harris
I thought I was the only one who had gotten creeped-out by these little
mutants. This is a site extolling some of the virtues(???) of this
particular marketing campaign. I found it curious that they said, “Well at
least it’s not horse flatulence…” Has it been reduced to finding the
lowest and strangest of gimmicks just to sell products now?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2095868/
Apparently there are people for whom the ad really works. I opine
(snicker) that I shall never eat at a Quiznos sub shop; I wouldn’t
want to be mistaken for one of those people.
From: Maurice Fairfield
At 09:17 PM 5/6/04 +1000, you wrote:
Thanks for getting back. Love your prose style although I think
my poetry may have an edge. You are right about acting: It’s a
great source of anecdotes which I don’t propose to bore you with.
I had a stage career in the early fifties – blew in there while
drunk as well, but stayed for the plentiful supply of pretty
young women. I was nearly the only straight guy in the business
and I was soon hunted down like a dog, married and a father.
That was fifty years ago. If I’d mudered someone the’d have let
me out by now. Ho, Hum. nice meeting you, Maurice Fairfield.
I suppose there are a lot of us who on the stage at one time or
another in our lives. Every once in a while I talk to someone
who bores, er fascinates, me with the details of their acting
career instead of listening to my much more interesting
account.
From: Michel Durinx
Reading through your letters column, I get the feeling that your
advice-policy is not optimal. For example, your advice to someone
coming up with a simulation proving that natural selection cannot
change phenotypes since only discrete numbers of offspring are possible
( http://richardhartersworld.com/~cri/2003/let03sep.html#Bucska )
gets the usual sensible “I’m not gonna discuss evolution over email”
response, followed by the “go bother talk.origins” advice which I would
object to. It is like sending people to Iraq when they come up with a
query about Islam in civil society: a discussion group filled with
experienced fundamentalists on both sides, some other old timers who
have learned to duck their heads from time to time, plus the additional
cannon fodder like you tend to send in there…
Still, the advice in this instance to go to talk.origins wasn’t all
that bad. I grant that there are many howler monkeys who contribute
little beyond sniping. However there are still some who will respond
in substance to a real inquiry.
From: Michel Durinx
At 06:57 PM 5/7/04 +0200, you wrote:
re:
http://richardhartersworld.com/cri/2004/let04may.html#Tremblay
specifically:
From: OwlzCatz
I like you! Your site is just marvelous. I cannot remember how I got to it,
however it is very fun. I’m a 60-year-old chick with an IQ of 135. But believe me,
I know nothing! Absolutely nothing! You remind me of all those smart guys in college.
Beard, sense of humor! Terrific!
You keep on keeping on!
From: Heidi Mueller
Did Rosemary Cloony ever sang that song? Thank you. Heidi
From: Maurice Fairfield
Stumbled into your site accidentally when drunk. Enjoyed it no end.
From: Bruce Corbett
For some reason, while playing on the net, I though of some poems I wrote
many years ago. I wrote search 1, search 2, and so on. I found them
there; something of mine will exist for a long time. Then I remember how
I always kept a copy of “fields of hell”. Somewhere along the way I lost
it. I searched Groups on google, but could not find the whole poem, then
I search web on google, and there it was. Thanks for taking the time to
put it up there.
From: Francois Tremblay
I have just read your evolution vs Creationism section. I am still reeling.
Some of the things you have thought of are mind-boggling. Incredible stuff.
I am curious however. I have made a syllogism out of your argument “A new
disproof of the existence of God” (at
http://richardhartersworld.com/cri/2002/disproof.html ). It is an airtight argument
that I intend to add to my book “Handbook of Atheistic Apologetics”.
However, I am not convinced of the truth of your premise “divine omniscience
would have the effect of collapsing all quantum superpositions because His
knowledge effectively observes all phenomena”. Could you please specify how
omniscience is the equivalent of “observation” as we understand it in
quantum physics ?
One way to look at the matter is to think of observation as interaction.
Consider Schrodinger’s cat in a box thought experiment. In it there is
a box completely sealed off from the outside world. Within the box there
is a cat, a source of poison gas, a radioactive source, a geiger counter,
and a switch. When the counter gets a set level of counts the switch is
thrown releasing the gas, which kills the cat.
We ask: If we open the box will we find a dead cat or a living cat. (The
truth is that the cat will be alive; it will have batted at the equipment
and disabled it. However we are talking physics here and not cats.) The
answer is that it might be either – the life and death of the cat depends
on the number of counts registered by the geiger counter, and that is a
sample of one from a probability distribution.
Still, if we open the box we either find a dead cat or a live cat. (The
texts never consider undead cats. Now that I think on it, I’ve never heard
of a vampire cat.) Now let us ask what is in the unopened box. We do not
know whether the cat is dead or alive, but surely we know that it is either
dead or alive. Right?
Wrong. The cat is neither dead nor alive as a definite state. Its psi
function is distributed between the two states. (Plus some tunneling. I
wonder what it means to do quantum tunneling between life and death.) It is
the interaction (the opening of the box) that collapses the quantum superpositions.
Now God is supposedly omniscient, knowing past, present, and future. God
supposedly is outside time and space. Being outside time and space He could
observe without interaction. That is He could observe the uncollapsed psi function
whilst the box was sealed and its collapse when it is opened. He can do all
this provided that His “observation” is outside space and time, i.e., He does
not interact with the universe.
That, however, is not the case. It is given that He interacts with the universe
from time to time. His interaction, however brief, however limited, carries with
it an implicit observation of all that was, all that is, and all that will be.
That observation enters the universe with Him, collapsing all quantum superpositions.
From: Jenni Jensen
I’m doing a paper for my college archaeology class. I was wondering if you
could e-mail me more information about Piltdown man? I know nothing about it.
That is why I chose this topic. It’s more interesting, in my opinion, to write
about something I know absolutely nothing about. Thank you very much!
They should give you more than a good start.
Index of contributors
Other Correspondence Pages
Date: 5/18/2004
Subj: More information
I regret to inform you that Jane Candace Eleanor Austin, popularly
known as Calamity Jane Austin, is a complete and utter fabrication.
That said, the answers to your questions are:
Return to index of contributors
Richard Harter
Date: 5/18/2004
Subj: Hydrogen Beer
Ha! I imagine that you thought that I can’t read Portuguese.
You would be right – I can’t. However babelfish does a
passable job of translation. You may be sure that I shall
never attend a Karaoke bar where they serve Hydrogen
Beer.
but (as you can see by looking at it) it’s mostly
useless. Hydrogen in air is explosive at concentrations
between 4% and 75%.
Whereas folly is explosive at much lower concentrations.
> Ha! I imagine that you thought that I can’t read Portuguese.
Well, yes. But I’m aware that there are several other languages
you cannot read, either. I wasn’t just picking on the Brazilians.
Weisenheimer: I can read every language but Greek.
How are you at Albanian? Dr. Lewis has an Albanian phrasebook, if
you ever need one. Not that he’s given me permission to snatch it
from his paws and lend it out, I should warn you.
Buffoon: Oh, good. Will you read this German newspaper for me.
Weisenheimer: Sorry, it’ all Greek to me.
I have seen the phrasebook and have even read sections of it.
Lamentably I didn’t think to memorize it. If ever I am kidnapped
by Lust Crazed Albanian Dwarfs I shall be at a loss as to what to
say to them.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/9/2004
Subj: Vampire cats”
The only Steven King books that I’ve read are the Gunslinger
books, so I wouldn’t know what is in “pet sematary”. Are they
vampire cats or merely things that seem like cats?
Hm… I’ve read the book 2/3rds of my lifetime ago. If I remember
correctly, there’s a road next to a house while on the other side of
the road there’s an forgotten Indian cemetery. The family’s cat is
quite early killed off in the story [probably it demanded too high
wages]. The children discover the burial ground, misspell it, and put
the cat there… so it comes back zombie-fashion, really smelling bad,
resembling a dirty version of itself [read: be replaced by cheaper,
lookalike actor], but having a very bad character indeed.
Zombies are undead by most reckonings, even if they aren’t vampires.
I suppose one can quibble about the rules for being a vampire. Dracula
was an undead human who fed on the blood of living humans. However one
doesn’t have to be undead nor is one restricted to the blood of one’s
own species – witness the vampire bat. Simply living one blood doesn’t
cut it though – nobody talks about vampire mosquitos or vampire leeches.
Maybe the rule is that you have to be a mammal in order to be a vampire.
I suspect that there may be a rule of dignity of prey also. One could
give credence to vampire cats that live on the blood of humans, but
scarcely credit vampire cats that live on the blood of chickens.
By the way, there’s also the cat people films — they’re were-cats
killing people to turn back into humans, so that counts as vampires!
I’ve seen the oldest version only, being set on an obvious cardboard
stage but with some audience members blacking out from scary realism
— a public still used to using its imagination as required for
theatre.
Theatre has the advantage of true three dimensionality.
Note: ‘thank you’ would be ‘bedankt’ in Dutch, but ‘merci’ in Flemish…
I’m an barely tolerated foreigner in this ‘norms&values;’ country the
last few years.
Merci.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/16/2004
Subj: where are you ?
Dear Asap,
Return to index of contributors
I doubt that you need my opinion, but here it is
anyway – you should send email to the right email address.
Date: 5/14/2004
Subj: Poetry
Email addressed to [email protected] is not forwarded to Mr. Harter –
it is received by Mr. Harter who rather naturally wants to know
what it is you might want.
Blush, blush. Your kind words are music to my ears. I regret to say
that none of my works are yet in book form, although I do have some
manuscripts awaiting transition to the printed page. I will be delighted
to let you know when any of them arrive at that happy destination.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/10/2004
Subj: Signs of the End of Days
The horse flatulence ad was a beer commercial during the superbowl.
I don’t recall it though. I doubt that it was anything more than
sophomoric humor whereas the mutants are creepy.
Also on a side note, I remember from a previous correspondence we shared
that you spoke of your affinity for the word “opined”. Now that you’ve
“opined” my eyes to it (sorry for the horrible pun) I have noticed it’s use
by several other web-authors, most notably James Randi. It’s like one of
those pleasant jingles that gets stuck in your head. Do you remember when
companies used pleasant jingles, as opposed to discordant mutant
“spokescreatures”?
The nice thing about “opine” is that it is a precise term, much to be
preferred to “feel” and “think”. “I feel” is best reserved for the state
of one’s health and one’s emotions. Thus: “I feel nauseous” would be an
appropriate description of one’s reaction to the Quiznos ad. And, of
course, “I think” is all too often merely presumptious.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/6/2004
Subj: Theatre days.
Hunted down like a dog, eh? No wonder your poetry has an edge.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 4/23/2004
Subj: evoloonies
You have a point there. For many years I followed talk.origins avidly.
For the past few years, though, I only look at it sporadically or not
at all. I’m not sure whether this is because I’ve matured (if I have
I seem to have taken an extraordinarily long time about it) or whether
it has gotten sillier over the years. For a certainty the volume has
increased.
In the mail in question, for example, an argument hinges on a silly
sophism that is contradicted by things even a creationist would admit
as evidence. Any demographic model or survey comes up with broken
amounts of offspring — say 2.4children/family — as they are
probabilities. [ The “rounding off the dimes” argument could easily be
used to prove there are no humans on earth, except possibly those we
*all* accept to have existed — the ones in the Bible, of course —
though they might have died in the meantime. You see, you have to
look per year. How many children per year does a woman beget? Well,
it’s clearly below 1, so say (random number) .3578 children per year.
As only whole numbers of children are produced, each year the child is
“rounded off to the dime” and there are no children (rounding up would
of course lead to some 50 children/woman, equally implausible).
So either every generation gives a 50-fold increase in the population,
or no children are born at all. But argumentation means “discussing
evolution in email”. ] So pointing to, for example, the CIA factbook
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html
[quote “Andora: fertility rate: 1.27 children/woman (2003 estimate)”]
would answer the mail without sending a correspondent into a battle
zone.
I didn’t read his reference to rounding that way. I thought it was just
an irrelevant analogy. Upon rereading, you may be right – he may be
assuming that a probability of .01 means that it happens exactly 1%
of the time. Then again, he might not be. His summary of results is
incoherent at best; capital letters are not a good substitute for reason.
Obviously there are other tricks and errors in the argumentation and
similar efforts, but they can be refuted by referring to less
contentious places like demography or ecology 101-type resources.
These have the benefit of being more driven by simple observances than
religeous/philosophical insights. After all, if you want to see
selection and evolution happening in a bottle you see it, if you want
to see its impossibility or futility you will see it. That’s the gist
of the american creationism schtick, I feel.
I’m skeptical of the value of referring to less contentious places.
Your suggestion works for people who are willing to ask, “Am I wrong?”
and are willing to consider the possibility. Most crackpots lack
that willingness.
As always enjoying your digital output,
Gracias. What is Dutch for “Thank you”?
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/7/2004
Subj: vampire cats
The texts never consider undead cats. Now that I think on it,
I’ve never heard of a vampire cat.
what about the very undead cats in King’s ‘pet sematary’ ?
The only Steven King books that I’ve read are the Gunslinger
books, so I wouldn’t know what is in “pet sematary”. Are they
vampire cats or merely things that seem like cats?
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/1/2004
Subj: Well….
Thank you for the kind words. My theory on life is that I will pack all it in
when I get everything done. The problem is that not only haven’t I got everything
done, I keep getting further and further behind. I figure that it will take me
around a thousand years to become a centenarian.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 4/17/2004
Subj: How much is that doggy in the window
I don’t know. Maybe one of my readers knows. I am told that
Patti Page did it originally.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/4/2004
Subj: Piltdown man
You can enjoy it while sober also. However I recommend drunk.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 5/5/2004
Subj: Fields of hell
You’re welcome. I put many things on the web on the chance someone might
find them.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 4/25/2004
Subj: disproof of the existence of God
It is not so clear that we understand observation in quantum physics. At
least it is quite clear that my understanding is limited. Still, I can
make observations on the subject.
I would be forever in your debt.
I suspect that you don’t owe me much. 🙂
Francois Tremblay
www.insolitology.com/personal/
Nice site.
Return to index of contributors
Date: 4/25/2004
Subj: Piltdown man
Why don’t you take a look at my piltdown man pages at
http://richardhartersworld.com/cri_a/piltdown/piltdown.html .
Return to index of contributors
This page was last updated May 21, 2004.