brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight jwknight at
Tue Sep 3 00:16:35 EST 2002

"Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at> wrote in message
news:FZTc9.7590$jG2.555158 at
> John Knight wrote in message ...
> >
> >"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at> wrote in message
> >news:hpf6nu4r2l8vaur3f35u98jmb4jrphtvfl at
> >> "John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
> >> >"Joni Rathbun" <jrathbun at> wrote in message
> >>
> >news:Pine.LNX.4.44.0208292238260.17316-100000 at
> >> >> > >> One hundred percent  of Fortune 500 Corporations' CEOs.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >Nonsense. Carly FIorina comes to mind.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Oh, yeah...the ceo that's driving hp to bankrupcy...she was
> an
> >> >> > excellant choice. What good does affermative action do when
> it just
> >> >> > lets incompitent people in?
> >> >>
> >> >> Irrelevant. Are 100% of Fortune 500 corporation CEOs male?
> >> >> No. At least a half dozen are not.
> >> >
> >> >This was compiled before women were CEOs of those corporations,
> so if 6
> >of
> >> >them are now women, this would explain why our economy is
> imploding.
> >> >
> >> >So you win another Dewey Button For Accuracy.  It will be
> adjusted to 494
> >/
> >> >500 = 98.8%.
> >>
> >> Actually, as of the last Fortune 500 it was 495.  5 women in the
> first
> >> 500 and 5 in the second 500.
> >>
> >>
> >> Of course CEO isn't the only corporate office of note.  Fortune
> has a
> >> list of the top 50 women in business, and the nincompoop will be
> >> disheartened to know that some of the countries he admires for
> their
> >> sexism are also including women at the top.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >What makes you think that these countries would make the same
> >made?
> >
> >Do you realize what's happened to confidence in the stock market
> since these
> >women were named to these positions?
> Mr. Knight, that's just not it.
> What happened was that, after WWII, 'strategies' followed by the U.
> S. A. and the 'USSR' 'stressed' socio-economic and political dynamics
> around the globe. This was the stuff of the "Cold War", with it's
> teetering-balance with respect to 'nuclear' anihilation.
> During this period, there was a lot of tit-for-tat militarization in
> which 'third world' Nations were induced to 'militarize', as proxies
> of either the USA or USSR, in those parties' 'struggle' for
> 'dominance', all with devastating consequences.
> After the 'Cold War' ground to a hault, when the reality of the
> Horror it actually constituted becoming recognized in the Cuban
> Missle Crisis, both the USA and USSR relatively-abruptly withdrew
> from their formerly-ongoing manipulative exertion of
> 'self-interested' force.
> The result, which is unfolding still, is that populations which were
> 'dominated' gained 'release' from such 'containing-pressure'.
> Within nervous systems, this was experienced as "rendering useless"
> [AoK, Ap8], a condition in which formerly-familiar stuff becomes
> relatively-rapidly 'non-functional'.

Only communists think that government is all-powerful like this.  Our
Christian Founding Forefathers envisioned a SMALL central government, and it
was small, right up until the 19th Amendment was passed.  After that, it's
done nothing but grow out of control, destroying the underlying economy
along the way.

Japanese citizens put 25-33 cents of every wage "dollar" in the bank because
their cost of government is less than 20 cents of each wage dollar.  That's
mainly why they're now able to make just about every consumer product we
consume, while we can't even make our own shoes.

> Within the nervous systems of the folks comprising the
> formerly-oppressed populations, this "rendering useless" of that with
> respect to which they'd become familiar, resulted in their neural
> activation going relatively-random.
> =This= is what precipitated all of the socio-economic and political
> 'degradation' that's being endured across the globe.
> It's all 'just' a Thermodynamic.
> Back during the 'Cold War', Truth with respect to the innate-Rights
> of all people, everywhere, was 'moved away from'.
> These days, all people, everywhere, are bearing the Consequences
> which always ensue Truth's being 'moved away from'.

Defense spending is only 3% of GDP, but here you are making the claim that
it controls our economy?  It could drop off the face of the planet and the
worst that would happen is that the economy wouldn't notice.  But there's an
upside--the $300 billion we currently dump down the rat hole for "defense
spending" could instead end up in private bank accounts, and American
citizens might have the first signs of "personal savings" in the bank that
they've had in a decade.

You're a communist.

You should move to Russia (except that Russia is throwing the communists out
as we speak and restoring Christianity).

> It's 'hilarious' that you 'attribute' all that's entailed to 'CEOs',
> either male or female.
> That which has befallen us all was brought-about through the
> concerted efforts of Governments that resorted to the Ignorant use of
> 'force', who applied such 'force' against the 'CEOs', and everyone
> else.

The combined loss SO FAR to just 5 female CEOs is $210 billion

The difference between defense dollars and pure enterprise dollars is that
we know there's no ROI on defense spending so it's already lost money--but a
$210 billion loss in enterprise dollars is a long term $2.1 trillion loss in

> We're all 'paying the cost' of Truth's having been 'moved away from'.
> It's as I've explained, Ignorance is the enemy, as it was during the
> 'Cold War' - as it's been throughout the course of Human history.
> The thing to do is remove the Ignorance so that folks can, then,
> 'move toward' Truth, rather than 'move away from' Truth.
> Because, Honor Truth, and Truth Honors one right-back.
> >[...]
> >Even after it's been explained to you numerous times, you obviously
> still
> >comprehend nothing about anybody's contribution to this economy or
> nation,
> >about anyone's children, or any other personal insult or LIE you
> feel
> >compelled to propagate, lojbab, so quit looking for an excuse to
> change the
> >subject.
> >
> >If anyone needs a financial adviser, you're literally the last
> person on the
> >list who'll be contacted.
> >
> >John Knight
> I suggest you consider-deeply the stuff of your own words, Mr.
> Knight.
> K. P. Collins

Why don't you quit handing out advice and start thinking about the issues?

You've obviously got plenty of issues to think about.

John Knight

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list