From: Auberon [fskln1@uaf.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 12:38 PM To: BP list Subject: [BLUE PLANET] - New toy Here's a weapon I created for a game that never really got off the ground. It's a 15mm (~.60 cal) sniper rifle. The caliber makes it overkill for a human, but it's designed to be able to seriously wound a cetacan as well. Input is, of course, welcome. -- +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= "I never get involved in my own life. It's too much trouble" - Michael Garibaldi (Babylon 5) From: David Klegman [klegman.1@osu.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:07 AM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: [BLUE PLANET] Website Update! Hey everybody! Somebody said there should be more Blue Planet websites. Here's a start. :-) The League of Professional Casualties website has been online for a while, but I haven't had time to work on it much until now. I am currently updating it! And, at his request, I am also hosting some stuff for Tun Kai Poh until he can set up his own BP site. There isn't a whole lot there yet (and what is there is subject to change), although I will be adding stuff in the next week or so. Check it out, and let me know what you think! http://students.uts.ohio-state.edu/klegman.1/prof_cas.html --Dave Klegman *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: Greg Childress [gregory.childress@yale.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 4:07 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: Re: [BLUE PLANET] - Humans and Ecological Destruction (LONG) -----Original Message----- From: Auberon To: Date: Monday, February 08, 1999 10:42 PM Subject: Re: [BLUE PLANET] - Humans and Ecological Destruction >Chris Sakal wrote: >> >> >Depends how you define "worth it". If you mean cheap, no. If you mean >> >your grandkids being able to breathe... >> Please name a single government program other than a war or the Marshall >> plan that actually did what it was supposed to for a price that even >> resembled what was budgeted for it. > >Did I ever say it'd be free, or even cheap? The question is one of >priorities. If yours is money, then this particular scheme isn't for >you. I'd gladly consider any reasonable alternative you'd care to offer. > Well, while you're counting out "free" and "cheap" you might want to throw out "reasonable" and "possible" as well. This kind of discussion seems to degenate to this point no matter how calm and rational it starts out and how carefully the participants watch themselves. Ultimately the reason that people want to talk about this sort of thing is that they want to demonstrate to the world that they are more 1) clear-headed 2) concerned 3) intelligent 4) well-informed 5) wise (or at least far-sighted) than the next guy. I'm not saying that these aren't real problems that "humanity", whatever that means, shouldn't be concerned about. The environment is obviously an important issue. It's quite right and proper that everyone be aware (at the very least aware) of the efforts to study, understand, engineer and otherwise tweak and safeguard our environment. But the thing is, the environment is a BIG issue. And conservation is an even bigger one. To really fully understand and offer suggestions that are anything more than armchair speculation would require advanced and in-depth knowledge of: biology, geology, chemisty, some astro-physics, world as well as regional and cultural history, socio-politics, geo-politics, regional and state politics, marketing, economics- regional, domestic and international- private law, corperate law, constitutional(or equivilent) law in all of the contries you wanted to address, and probably hundreds of others I'm not going to list. Because of this there is simply NO WAY that any one person, no matter how emotionally attached to the issue of global-ecological preservation could ever put forth a complete solution could not be shot-down, torn-up and generally pooh-poohed by EVERY OTHER concerned party for a variety of reasons. The sheer scope of the issue causes well-thought out proposals by intelligent concerned individuals to, in the end, be no more sensible than an eco-wacko telling us to all go back to living in trees and eating what we can catch with our bare hands (no tools, you republican-evildoers!!) or a meglomaniacal corperate stooge claiming that the environment doesn't exist and is only a crock used by commie-pinkos to garner support. When and if our ecological problems are solved I can safely predict that a book will be written looking back and telling the world how it all was accomplished; whose idea fixing the environment was and which politicians or what-have-you achieved that sterling victory. And that book and all the others like it will be utter loads of horse-crap. Just like studies proporting to explain the "reasons" for a war, they will be attempting to put a nice little consumer-digestable package around a series of events which comprise the totality, or at least a large percentage of the totality, of human endeavor and experience up to whatever point the story "ends". Reality simply doesn't happen in episodes. Its going on all the time everywhere at once and in the end it's the whole picture that determines what happens and it's the parts of that picture that you focus on that determines what you consider to be important. The other side of this coin is that everything that everyone does affects what happens. So go ahead and recycle like mad; write to your representative, do whatever it is that you want to do "about" the enviroment (even nothing but bitching about it on relatively obscure small-readership mailing lists) Take heart in the fact that, if the solution is an emergant property of all that humanity is than everything you do has an effect. Just remember that it's always going to be an "effect" at the level you can see, not a solution. It's not a question of priorites. Tariff's and government intervention cannot solve the problem. Part of why that is is that it wouldn't happen because of economic reality. It's not Chris' fault that that is true. Even if he were willing to sign over everything he has and will earn to "the cause" it wouldn't matter as anything more than a symbol. I know that this is hard to accept for any american alive today, but there are some problems that you can't solve no matter how much you tax the rich. On the other hand, every approach is likely to seem impossible at first. Dismissing any concept based on things like economic reality is pretty silly too- economic reality can and has changed. Greg *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: Tun Kai Poh [t_poh@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 8:31 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: Re: [BLUE PLANET] Website Update! Dave Klegman said: >The League of Professional Casualties website has been online for a while, >but I haven't had time to work on it much until now. I am currently >updating it! And, at his request, I am also hosting some stuff for Tun Kai >Poh until he can set up his own BP site. Amen to that! I've only got three short things on the site at present, two of which have shown up on this list in the past, but I will be sending more articles for Dave to add, in the near future. Incidentally, Dave and I are both from the gaming group which coined the phrase "Professional Casualty"... Kai Poh Malaysian Lagomorph ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: Auberon [fskln1@uaf.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:31 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: Re: [BLUE PLANET] - Humans and Ecological Destruction (LONG) Greg Childress wrote: > [ka-SNIP] > others like it will be utter loads of horse-crap. Just like studies > proporting to explain the "reasons" for a war, they will be attempting to > put a nice little consumer-digestable package around a series of events That depends which books. All wars are started for economics or population pressure (which has economic effects). If you're talking about the books that try to explain, in 120 pages, the political decisions, alliances, dislikes, personal involvements, etc. that the economics and public opinion were cloaked in, that's completely true. > It's not a question of priorites. Tariff's and government intervention > cannot solve the problem. Part of why that is is that it wouldn't happen If you've been reading this discussion (I think it's been a few different threads, now) you'll have noted that never once has a "solution" been addressed. At most, there have been comments on actions which might have some effect. Barring, of course, Alien Space Bats coming down and rearranging the brains of the entirety of humanity to be conservationist and more focused on the long term. > because of economic reality. It's not Chris' fault that that is true. Even > if he were willing to sign over everything he has and will earn to "the > cause" it wouldn't matter as anything more than a symbol. I know that this Wouldn't even matter as a symbol, really. No one would notice, unless it were to happen at exactly the right time in a media circus. In which case it'd get 7-10 sec mention. > is hard to accept for any american alive today, but there are some problems > that you can't solve no matter how much you tax the rich. On the other I don't know that taxation has entered the conversation at all, except as a side note that there'd be some effect on the taxes you pay if big tax credits were given as incentives to corporations that operated within some definition of "shiny-happy-eco-friendly". > hand, every approach is likely to seem impossible at first. Dismissing any > concept based on things like economic reality is pretty silly too- economic > reality can and has changed. And the whole discussion to this point, you'll note by looking it over in the archives on the Biohazard site, has been on the order of proposing an idea, modifying it to address criticisms directed it's way, and eventually following the same process again with another idea that's proposed to replace the first when it finally starts to break down under the pressure. We also have on the list in no particular order: an ecology teacher, a rocket scientist, at least two people who seem pretty handy with economics (myself not included), and a large number of people who follow politics, whose bias (IMHO) tends to balance out. We've even got an attack Libertarian. (Hi, Robert! :->) That said, I do take some umbrage at a discussion being attacked by someone not taking part in it as, also in no particular order, an outlet for the egomania of those taking part, irrelevant, and ridiculous. Of course it's irrelevant. If we were all U.S. Congressthings, it'd be irrelevant. That doesn't mean that by the exchange of ideas, we can't learn from it. I've been forced to reshape my thinking in various ways by just about everyone, at least once. That is the purpose of intellectual discourse. And if you don't mind, I'm going to continue to do so through conversation with the various intelligent people on this list. -- +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= "I never get involved in my own life. It's too much trouble" - Michael Garibaldi (Babylon 5) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: BIOHZD@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:20 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: [BLUE PLANET] - Access Denied Hey All, Just a quick note to let you know we are getting even closer... I just got the final draft of the screen front today, and superlatives fail me ; ). It is simply the coolest. We paid about $1000 for it, and it was worth every penny. Even if it were the only thing you got in Access Denied, I guarrantee it would be worth the price of admission! I can not wait until you get to see it! Jeff Barber Biohazard Games *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: BIOHZD@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:38 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: [BLUE PLANET] - Cetacean HtH... Hey Gordon, You asked some questions: 1) What kind of poisons work/don't work against cetaceans? >>>>Good question - I know that most mammals are sensitive to many of the same toxins, but this in not always true. Any medicos or vets out there? Is there a special course needed to know how or where to... oh let's say... stab a cetacean for maximum effect. >>>>Internal anatomy is similar, and so lungs and heart should be effective, especially under pressure. Do self-defense courses cover how to fight a dolphin? >>>>Maybe certain military hand-to-hand classes, but I would think that the strength and underwater agility differences would severely limit the effectiveness of humans in the cetacean's natural environment. 2) The "gear" section of the BP book mentions a "gun-link" modification. It also says that marshals have a special program loaded into their brains that lets them NEVER miss. Is that supposed to be true? Do BP Marshals ever miss? Technically - yes. Practically - no. Check out UC #4 for the details. BTW - We have not forgotten about UC #5. It is in the works, but as you can imagine, finishing up Access Denied has taken priority. Later, Jeff Barber Biohazard Games *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message. From: Robert P. Stefko [rpsst16@pop.pitt.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 11:25 PM To: blue_planet@MPGN.COM Subject: Re: [BLUE PLANET] - Humans and Ecological Destruction (LONG) >We also have on the list in no particular order: an ecology teacher, a rocket scientist, at least two people who seem pretty handy with economics (myself not included), and a large number of people who follow politics, whose bias (IMHO) tends to balance out. We've even got an attack Libertarian. (Hi, Robert! :->)< Yip-yip! Grrr. Rowowowowow!!! *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe blue_planet' as the body of the message.