Who Were the Sea Peoples?

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Universal Walloons and by a grant from the Ants of America. We thank them for their help. Neither this infinite sequence of sequences nor any of the component sequences (which are all finite) is an unfolding sequence, but you will notice reminiscent properties. How is this generated? For component S( n ), consider all words composed of "1" and "2" of length 0- n . Left justify. Sort. S( n ) is the lengths of the words in sorted order. Thus S(2): Possible words are -,1,2,11,12,21,22. In sorted order, they are -,1,11,12,2,21,22. Their lengths comprising S(2) are 0,1,2,2,1,2,2. 0....................................................................0- 0 011..................................................................0- 2 0122122..............................................................0- 6 012332331233233......................................................0- 14 0123443442344344123443442344344..............

Just because you've spent half a century as one of the greatest philosophers in the world doesn't mean Brian Leiter won't trash you should you deviate from his religious dogmas!

It turns out that plants do things like calling over parasitic insects to kill off the eggs of insects that eat the plants . So, all you vegans who have been cruelly preying upon the plant kingdom: next time you eat a carrot, watch your back!

of a 2400-page health-care bill written by insurance companies to line their own pockets?! Why then, the "non-partisan" people at Rock the Vote declare you are a "creep" who must never be allowed to have sex again: F the Vote w/ Zach Gilford & Eva Amurri from Zach Gilford (Hat tip to Nick Gillespie.)

Brian Doherty, in what is at least partially a response to one of my earlier posts here at Crash Landing, writes: "This aspect of Rothbard is sometimes used to attack him as an unserious thinker, but it isn’t fair to the purpose of this sort of polemic. While, for example, he is not capturing the full nuances of Karl Polanyi’s history or analysis in his The Great Transformation, Rothbard is doing what he was asked to do—sniffing out a detectable set of beliefs about modern civilization, currency, and markets that make Polanyi an ineffective ally for radical libertarians." Doherty also notes: "His critiques often have language along the lines of this comment on his beloved economist mentor Mises: 'Mises’ utilitarian, relativist approach to ethics is not nearly enough to establish a full case for liberty.'” In "defending" Rothbard against my critique, Doherty, in fact, makes the very point I have been trying to make: in what are supposedly works on the ...

Brian Doherty writes : "States, after all, cannot function without first aggressing against someone, if only to get tax money to fund their activities." It's amazing to me that libertarians can make such statements as if they were obviously true or uncontroversial, and something with which their opponents already agree. "So, you see," they will continue, "you are in favor of some forms of aggression!" But this argument is entirely circular as it is typically formed: The State is illegitimate because it engages in aggression, and we can say it must engage in aggression because its collection of taxes is illegitimate -- but, of course, since the collection of taxes is how the State survives, to say their collection is illegitimate is to just re-state that the State is illegitimate. Thus, the argument runs, "The State is illegitimate because the State is illegitimate." Or, to put it differently, if the State is legitimate, then so is its colle...