From repubgirl@yahoo.com Tue Feb 27 10:58:51 2001
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:46:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Repubgirl 
To: bhance@maydaymystery.org
Subject: Fwd: A small sign of our esteem


    [ Part 1, Text/PLAIN  35 lines. ]
    [ Unable to print this part. ]


COOL!  Can we all have maydaymystery.org addresses!!??

Wanted to make sure you got this...I sent it to your old email address.

Kim

  library@libcong.com wrote:
      Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:28:46 -0700
      From: library@libcong.com
      Subject: A small sign of our esteem
      To: repubgirl@yahoo.com

      Dear Repubgirl:

              As you know, much discussion has been underway as to
      the extent of this communication.  A synthesized consensus
      has ensued:

      You, Carlos and Jessica have the most consistent interest in
      the Biblical thrust; Carlos is submerged in labor and Jessica
      is fairly new--although you may wish to discuss the following
      with her} It is suggested that the very able Repubgirl make a
      list or even some form of "spreadsheet" that includes all the
      Biblical quotations, but not by chronology.  Instead, it is
      suggested, that you gather the quotes and then sort them by
      the order in which they would occur in the English
      translation of the Bible.  As you know, that means the
      Protestant order and only the Protestant order.

      Once you, at your leisure, have done that it is further
      suggested that two routes of analysis present themselves. 
      The most promising is to use your intuition.  (With that
      tactical approach, Jessica might be able to render
      assistance.)  Do what you do best: think like a woman. 
      Forget Aristotelian logic and its various descendants and do
      whatever it is that women do by way of reaching conclusions. 
      You are very likely to see aspects which others are missing.

      The other route, which you may prefer for the sake of its
      Entertainment value, is to give some thought to Euclid's Book
      V, Proposition 18: "If magnitudes be proportional separando,
      they will also be proportional compenendo."  If you pursue
      this approach, do not overlook the more famous commentators,
      especially Saccheri by way of Simson.  Once you have given
      some thought to the foregoing, compare that with what is
      sometimes called "De Morgan's sketch of a general proof of
      the assumed proposition." [Heath].  If you work your way down
      to "less than M is in a greater ratio to B than P to Q," the
      point should become clear.  It is respectfully suggested that
      this (neo-)Euclidean approach is not the treatment of choice
      but it should bring you to the same (correct) set of data, as
      would the (preferred) Intuitive.

      One final point: in the unlikely event that the individual or
      individuals known from the e-mails as "nobody@nowhere" should
      contact you--approach data transmission with acute
      circumspection.  Their inquiries may be benign but in another
      context it would be probable that (somatic) analysis would
      detect an elevated level of neopterin.  In nuce,  their
      motive may be malignant.  In matters of unknown motivation it
      is always wise to remember the remark found in The Bay
      Psalter: "In Adam's fall sinned we all."  If they are
      sincere, they will persevere.
       

                                           Best Regards and
      continuing Esteem,

                                                THE   ORPHANAGE