... Dreambook ...scripted

kanglyer
Welcome to Dreambook, a nifty new free service from:
New Dream Network, Dreamhost, and Dreamservers!

If you have a minute, please sign my Dreambook too!


Name: Test
Comments:
Sunday, November 23rd 2003 - 02:57:29 AM
Name: Test
Comments:test
Sunday, November 23rd 2003 - 01:17:40 AM
Name: art
Homepage URL: http://www.vaxxine.com/hyoomik/lublin/art.htm
Comments:http://www.vaxxine.com/hyoomik/lublin/art.htm
Sunday, September 14th 2003 - 09:22:13 PM
Name: logics
Homepage URL: http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e11a.htm
Sunday, August 10th 2003 - 09:40:53 PM
Name: logics
Homepage URL: http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e10a.htm
Sunday, August 10th 2003 - 09:38:19 PM
Name: Windows Longhorn
Homepage URL: http://www.xichang-window.com/software/SoftView.asp?SoftID=250
Comments:http://www.xichang-window.com/software/SoftView.asp?SoftID=250
Tuesday, June 24th 2003 - 05:34:45 PM
Name: DNA
Comments:MARGARET WARNER: It was 50 years ago today that a pair of scientists, James Watson and Francis Crick, told the world they had unlocked the secret of the structure of DNA. DNA is the basic building block of life, a chemical molecule in the nucleus of virtually every cell that transmits the genetic code of one generation to the next. Watson and Crick published their news in the most modest of ways: With a one-page paper in the British Journal Nature. The report included a small illustration of the twisted ladder-like double helix structure they'd discovered.

We get more on why that finding was so important then, and its ongoing implications, from a leading geneticist: Eric Lander. He's director of the Whitehead Institute-MIT Center for Genome Research, and one of the leaders of the Human Genome Project.

Welcome Mr. Lander. Take us back to 1953 and tell us why this was such a big deal, this discovery, even at the time given where scientific understanding was.

ERIC LANDER: It was remarkable. This was the important question in biology in the 20s century. How do you explain heredity? How is it that organisms, parents transmit information to their children? Well, one day April 24, nobody knew and on April 25, it all became apparent. It all fell into place. And the answer was this beautiful structure of the DNA double helix. The secret was each strand was a copy of the other strand. And the way that information was copied was the two strands of the molecule came apart and each served as a template for the other. It was the greatest a-ha moment in science and it was 50 years ago today.

MARGARET WARNER: Tell us about these two guys, Crick and Watson.

ERIC LANDER: Well, if you were a betting person and you were trying to bet on the great horse race of who is going to discover the secret of life, you wouldn't have bet on Crick and Watson. They were about the oddest couple you could imagine. Jim Watson was a kid, 25 years old, came over from the United States to work in England where he was... he was interested in bird watching and things like that, had done a biology degree in the states.

Francis Crick was 35. He was a physicist, hadn't done a thing in biology. He had worked in the British admiralty during War World II. And the two of them hooked up at the Cambridge Medical Council and they were going to crack the secret of life, the structure of DNA, and they were doing it up against the greatest scientists in the world at the time, the chemist Linus Pauling who was in hot pursuit and other people who were thinking about this as well. But in the end, when the dust settled, they were the people who figured out the simple and really beautiful secret.

MARGARET WARNER: And when they did, they knew it, didn't they?

ERIC LANDER: They knew it instantly. There are some discoveries where it takes a long time before the people who make them realize how important it was. But Jim Watson figured out in the morning, before lunchtime, that the As and Ts fit together in DNA, and the Cs and Gs fit together and consumed the same amount of space in the double helix, and by lunchtime they announced to the eagle pub and announced to everybody within ear shot, we found the secret of life. They very clearly knew it that day by lunchtime.

MARGARET WARNER: What is your theory about why this odd couple succeeded where other larger scientific figures hadn't?

ERIC LANDER: Well, I think they knew a secret, which was they talked a lot. They talked to each other incessantly about different ideas about how it might work and they listened a lot. They went down to London, for example, where they talked to Rosalind... they talked to Maurice Wilkins who showed them an x-ray photograph of Rosalind Franklin's and they absorbed that information, which turned out to contain a very important piece of the puzzle. That DNA was somehow helical. They listened, they read, but they just talked incessantly and they turned the problem over and over again.

By contrast, someone like Linus Pauling, a very distinguished scientist, maybe he was too distinguished 24 his own good here. Pauling came up with, a few months before, a triple helical model for DNA that was absolutely patently wrong absolutely. It had the structure all backwards, couldn't possibly work, and yet somehow nobody told him. Maybe because he was so famous and such a good chemist nobody would point it out. Crick and Watson had just the right amount of audacity and obscurity and loquaciousness and they just pursued it doggedly. And they were also kind of lucky because if they hadn't discovered it, you can bet three or four months later others would have made the same discovery.

MARGARET WARNER: And they felt very much, did they not, that they were in a race?

ERIC LANDER: They knew they were completely in a race and were underdogs in a race because as so often happens in science, it was in the air. In the previous couple of years, it had become clear that DNA itself was the molecule of heredity and the big question was how, how in the world could some molecule encode heredity information? They knew. Although most people around them didn't really pick it up, but they knew this was the question for the century.

MARGARET WARNER: So what has their discovery meant already for science, biology, ands polling, genealogy, all these fields?

ERIC LANDER: Well, I mean, it has been just the unlocking of secrets in other possible direction -- in medicine, in evolution, far more than Crick and Watson could have imagined. They've said as much in the course of this anniversary, that they knew it was an important thing, but they completely underestimated how far it would go. Once we realized that information was absolutely encoded in the sequence of letters of the DNA, a whole stream of discoveries flowed out over the course of the next couple of decades.

We figured out how the cell actually encodes the instructions for making the proteins in our hair and our skin and in our blood, all in a certain genetic code. By the '60s, that code was known. By the '70s, the techniques common in DNA were worked out that let people propagate, clone pieces of DNA from human beings and bacteria and then very soon begin to work out their sequence. By the 1980s, it was possible to work out a few hundreds of letters of sequence in a day. And then people set their sights on the idea of reading out the three billion letters of the human genome. By the mid-1980s, the Human Genome Project was launched. And by last week, last Monday, the human genome project reached its completion, a double anniversary here with the DNA double helix when it announced the completion of the sequence, the finished sequence to the human genome.

So we now have before us the instruction book for medicine. We have all the building blocks of a cell, and medical geneticists have been clawing all over this data to try to figure out what are the causes of diabetes and asthma and hypertension an the whole field of medicine is now focusing on molecular causes and molecular diagnostics and molecular therapies but at the same time it has unlocked the secrets of evolution because we can read the secret sequence of the human being, we can read the sequence of a mouse and line them up and see that they were the same text 57 million years ago and they've just changed a little bit here and there and we can characterize all the changes.

By this summer, scientist will have the secrets of the chimpanzee genome and we can look at what happened in human history. And of course in law, both law enforcement officials and individuals who have been unjustly convicted have been able to use DNA information as some of the most powerful forensic tool for both convicting the guilty and exonerating the innocent. It's unimaginable.

Monday, April 28th 2003 - 07:54:25 PM
Name: lainzhu
E-mail address: http://cn.geocities.com/b010263/index.htm
Homepage URL: http://butterfly
Sunday, April 20th 2003 - 03:27:04 PM
Name: Bruce Lee
Comments:http://asp3.6to23.com/aqn/wsyj/lxlyz/lxltsg/lxltsg.htm
Monday, April 7th 2003 - 06:53:33 PM
Name: Bruce Lee
Comments:http://asp3.6to23.com/aqn/wsyj/lxlyz/qdwxyz/jqdzd/jqdzd.htm
Monday, April 7th 2003 - 06:46:40 PM
Name: Bruce Lee
Comments:http://www.becoming.8m.net/bruce02.htm
http://www.enterbrucelee.com/quotes6.html
http://www.ironcrane.com/html/blf.htm
Monday, April 7th 2003 - 06:28:11 PM
Name: Paul Wolfowitz
Comments:Paul Wolfowitz
Monday, March 10th 2003 - 06:08:23 PM
Name: jdbgmgr.exe
Comments:http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/jdbgmgr.exe.file.hoax.html
Thursday, February 6th 2003 - 08:57:57 PM
Name: Scarlet
E-mail address: scarlet@snow-leopard-cats.com
Homepage URL: http://www.snow-leopard-cats.com
Comments:You have done a wonderful job on this site!
Wednesday, September 11th 2002 - 02:12:16 AM
Name: b
Homepage URL: http://www.hhfg.org/fjyj.html
Comments:http://www.hhfg.org/fjyj.html
Monday, May 27th 2002 - 06:25:21 PM
Name: liberty
Homepage URL: http://www.independent.org/tii/forums/machanipfTrans.html
Sunday, April 14th 2002 - 07:08:28 PM
Name: law
Homepage URL: http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CAP/CALHOUN/jcc4.html
Sunday, April 14th 2002 - 06:35:47 PM
Name: constitution
Homepage URL: http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv3Contents.html
Sunday, April 14th 2002 - 05:44:36 PM
Name: constitution
Homepage URL: http://www.dushu.net/cgi-bin/xz/xz.cgi
Sunday, April 14th 2002 - 05:29:40 PM
Name: abing
Homepage URL: http://www.shef.ac.uk/uni/academic/I-M/mus/staff/js/AbPref.html
Thursday, February 14th 2002 - 08:52:13 PM
Name: computer skills
Homepage URL: http://www.astalavista.com/
Thursday, January 31st 2002 - 08:09:32 PM
Name: paintings
Homepage URL: http://210.76.63.176/zyhz/kj1.htm
Thursday, January 24th 2002 - 08:33:08 PM
Name: artworks
Homepage URL: http://cn.cl2000.com/art100/artworks.php
Thursday, January 24th 2002 - 07:51:22 PM
Name: paintings
Comments:http://caoxl.attin.com/
Thursday, January 24th 2002 - 07:05:53 PM
Name: 埨懼
E-mail address: manti@263.net
Comments:怴怴闻恖帺妛庤檈乮4乯丗埨懼揑怴闻澗錟夹
憲岎幰: 埨懼 槹 January 25, 2002 02:48:20:[怴观嶡/xgc2000.com]
嵮访归棃揑搑拞嫀椆堦趟墹晎堜东曽怴揤抧艺术书揦丆买椆巐份嶐揤揑塸暥报纸乻撿华憗报乼乻崙际愭驱论坛乼乻亚廎华尔奨擔报乼乻崱擔旤崙乼丆壴椆嬤昐尦丅欒欒丆擛壥惀拞崙揑报纸丆顶懡10尦廇擻懪壓丅娕棃丆还惀梫埶赖悚络棃椆夝怴闻丆妛习怴闻幨嶌丅

忋師変夘绍椆嵟廳梫揑塸暥攠懱丆岲嵄朁桭涍经开巒练拝東译椆丅对丆樃東译嵟岲揑暥復开巒帺屓揑怴闻幨嶌丆妛习懠们说屘帠揑曽幃丆妛习懠们评论揑风奿丅还桳丆对忋復橍弌檣揰嵟廳梫揑补廩丗

1乯拲堄丗CNN壜埲捈愙访问揑抧毈惀 http://asia.cnn.com乮亚廎斉丆拞崙怴闻峏详细乯
——————————————————————————
2乯CNN壜埲捠过简单戙棟暈务婍访问揑抧毈惀 http://207.25.71.5乮崙际斉乯
3乯BBC壜埲捠过简单戙棟暈务婍访问揑抧毈惀 http://212.58.240.36
4乯乻华惙顿邮报乼幮论斉乮悽奅嵟岲揑幮论斉乯壜埲捠过简单戙棟暈务婍访问揑抧毈惀 http://64.215.175.141/wp-dyn/opinion

帄槹廦么惀简单戙棟暈务婍丆为廦么这么橍擻访问丆変廇晄详细夝释椆丅懘实擛壥堦槩悚鈰橍揑岲丆梡这种曽朄惀壜埲姰慡访问揑丅壜惿桳揑悚鈰橍揑蹇丆変们杤暉焹娕摓丅岲丆壓柺开巒夘绍変揑怴闻澗錟夹椆乮忋復夘绍揑悚鈰搒晄嵞夘绍椆乯丅

[怴闻妛榓怴闻尮揑婲尮]

庱愭丆変栫杤资奿橍榁师丆変榓你们堦样嵼乬帺妛乭丆帶変廇惀樃壓柺这嵄鈰揰开巒抦摴哪棦惀岲怴闻尮揑丅巈细抧嫀娕这嵄悚鈰丆你夛发现堦槩优质怣懅揑奀梞丅欒欒丆庼擵埲渔丆徣揑你们烦変丅

Google悽奅廳梫攠懱擖岥 http://www.google.com/news
悽奅奺崙嵼线报纸夘绍乮1乯 http://www.ipl.org/reading/news
悽奅奺崙嵼线报纸夘绍乮2乯 http://www.newspapers.com/country.htm
崙际丄戜榩攠懱榓尋媶婘构夘绍 http://www.crf.org.cn/links/home.htm
Poynter怴闻妛悚忋妛堾 http://poynter.org乮渒岲揑帺妛怴闻妛揑悚鈰乯
乬编辑榓弌斉恖乭 http://www.editorandpublisher.com/editorandpublisher/index.jsp
欶伦斾亚怴闻妛评论 http://www.cjr.org

[塸旤奜电怴闻乮每擔峏怴揑乯]

乻懽濍巑报乼http://www.thetimes.co.uk
乻婎撀嫵壢妛饧尵报乼 http://www.csmonitor.com
乻崱擔旤崙乼 http://usatoday.com
旤崙涼攄岞巌 http://abcnews.go.com
塸崙卫报婙壓揑乻观嶡壠乼http://www.observer.co.uk
塸崙乻每擔电讯乼 http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk

[塸旤廃姧杂巙]

乻每廃标弝乼 http://www.weeklystandard.com
乻奜岎杂巙乼 http://www.foreignaffairs.org
乻嵐龙乼 http://www.salon.com
乻旤崙观嶡幰乼 http://www.gilder.com/amspec/index.html
乻怴嫟榓乼 http://www.tnr.com/
乻崙壠评论乼 http://www.nationalreview.com
乻崙壠杂巙乼 http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/
乻纽约媞乼 http://www.newyorker.com/
乻纽约书评乼The New York Review of Books Home http://www.nybooks.com/
乻奜岎惌嶔乼 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/
乻亚摿兰戝乼The Atlantic Online http://www.theatlantic.com//
乻岎惌嶔阙徟乼http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/
乻柉懓乼The Nation http://www.thenation.com/
乻进步乼Homepage of The Progressive magazine http://www.progressive.org/
乻梞擪乼 http://www.theonion.com/乮桳庯怴闻鈰揰乯

[时帠资椏]

埨慡惌嶔尋媶拞怱 http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/
旤崙崙务堾奺崙攚宨http://www.state.gov/r/pa/bgn/
悽奅奺崙抧图 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/index.html
卫惎徠曅 http://www.spaceimaging.com/
悚忋奺崙惌晎资椏 http://www.gksoft.com/govt/en/
拞崙奜岎晹奺崙攚宨 http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/c242.html

[塸旤忢梡经济悚鈰]

塸崙乻嬥梈时报乼 http://news.ft.com/home/rw乮惀泙嵟愭报摴椆飞婘愞欉婍帠審乯
乻彜业廃姧乼 http://news.ft.com/home/rw
乻财晉乼 http://www.fortune.com/fortune
乻远东经济评论乼http://www.feer.com乮拞崙银峴帠審泙报摴揑斾较详细乯
乻暉晍巣乼http://www.forbes.com
欶伦斾亚涼攄岞巌乻巗场观嶡乼http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/default.asp?siteid=mktw
乻奨乼 http://www.thestreet.com/ 乮惀泙捅弌椆埨慠塏闻乯

————————————
埲壓揑惀変嵼这敿擭忢堷梡揑崙际怴闻尮丆晄堦掕慡柺丆戝壠壜埲帺屓漄丅

[旕塸旤廃姧杂巙榓资椏鈰揰]

崙乻镜报乼http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel乮揰击English Texts乯
嫵掛乻罗马观嶡壠乼http://www.vatican.va/news_services/or/or_eng/index.html
彿崕乻晍漟奿邮报乼 http://www.praguepost.cz/
乻夆罗巣廃姧乼 http://www.russiajournal.com/
塸崙乻简巵杊务廃姧乼 http://www.janes.com/乮弌怓揑军帠杂巙乯
毢媦乻拞东时报乼 http://www.metimes.com/
乻攂栌巣扲时报寧姧乼http://www.ptimes.com/
攂栌巣扲乻栯楬嶵椻时报乼 http://www.jerusalem-times.net/
毢媦乻Al-Ahram廃姧乼 http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/
垻晉娋尋媶 http://www.institute-for-afghan-studies.org/
拞东怴闻http://www.middleeastwire.com/
埲怓楍DEBKA瀮埬 http://www.debka.com/乮堦槩忣报鈰揰乯
曐壛棙亚乻庱搒廃姧乼http://www-us.capital.bg/old/weekly/index.html
峜掗揑怴憰 http://www.emperors-clothes.com
慡媴庡义幰 http://www.theglobalist.com/
戜榩乻东怷怴闻报乼 http://www.ettoday.com/乮忋師変楻漿揑拞暥鈰揰乯


[旕塸旤奜电怴闻乮每擔峏怴乯]

乻东柨怴闻乼 http://www.aseanreview.com
渖棩宾乻惎报乼 http://www.philstar.com/htmtest/index.htm
渖棩宾乻每擔调查乼 http://www.inq7.net/
報擈乻夒壛达邮报乼 http://www.thejakartapost.com/headlines.asp
怴壛毐乻奀嫭时报乼 http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/home
攂婎巣扲乻阾柧报乼 http://www.dawn.com
乻報搙时报乼 http://www.timesofindia.com
擈攽尔怴闻 http://www.nepalnews.com.np
崙乻朄兰崕暉汇报乼http://www.faz.com/IN/INtemplates/eFAZ/default.asp
夆罗巣乻敎巣壢时报乼http://www.moscowtimes.ru
曐壛棙亚乻怴闻报乼 http://news.bg/en/
曐壛棙亚乻嶕渖亚夞惡报乼 http://www.sofiaecho.com/
乻爱尔兰时报乼 http://www.ireland.com/
埲怓楍乻欫垻棆兹乼 http://www.haaretzdaily.com/乮旕塸旤攠懱拞嵟岲揑评论弌嵼这槩报纸乯
埳漟崕怴闻 http://www.uruklink.net/iraqnews/eindex.htm
乻约扷时报乼 http://www.jordantimes.com
垻联廢乻Khaleej时报乼 http://www.khaleejtimes.com/
屆攂乻奿漟玛乼 http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html
垻崻掛乻晍媂诺巣鋱棙巣愭驱报乼http://www.buenosairesherald.com
煚旕廎嵼线 http://allafrica.com/
联崌崙怴闻拞怱 http://www.un.org/News

——————————————————————————————————

岲椆丆这廇惀変揑澗錟夹揑強桳怴闻鈰揰椆丆摉慠懘懠揑妛术丄资椏丄论坛榓MM鈰揰丆変廇晄漒弌棃椆丆場为榓怴闻澷关丅変憐说揑惀丆这嵄惀悽奅怣懅揑抧图丆扐惀嵟廳梫揑鈰揰还惀忋两復変说揑撨嵄拞塸暥鈰揰丅怴怴闻恖庤檈暂时幨摓这棦丆場为変觉摼擻榓这檣復旵攝揑怴復节変还杤桳弝备岲丅

旕忢婓朷娕过这巐復怴怴闻恖庤檈揑恖擻够廩暘妛习悽奅奺崙怴闻揑幨嶌庤朄丆鷿强帺屓对怴华幮橈怴闻揑识别擻椡丆涹妿惉为変揑对庤丅懘实桳椆这嵄丆拞崙揑怴闻嫵堢廇壜埲姰慡PASS椆丆欒欒丆懠们嶼廦么东惣丅擛壥婓朷岎棳丆壜埲给変发email丆manti@263.net丆MM峏岲丆嘿嘿丅

Thursday, January 24th 2002 - 04:37:48 PM
Name: elated
Homepage URL: http://www.elated.com/pagekits/
Tuesday, January 22nd 2002 - 08:07:04 PM
Name: PHOTO
Homepage URL: http://www.newphoto.org/erce-e/index.htm
Tuesday, January 22nd 2002 - 07:51:09 PM
Name: PHOTO
Homepage URL: http://www.newphoto.org/race/index.htm
Tuesday, January 22nd 2002 - 07:48:33 PM
Name: roundhead
Comments:http://www.sabong.com.ph/
Thursday, January 17th 2002 - 03:00:58 AM
Name: Space rock
Comments:Space rock hurtles past Earth


By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse
An asteroid discovered just a month ago is making a close approach to the Earth.

Although there is no danger of collision with it, astronomers say that its proximity reminds us just how many objects there are in space that could strike our planet with devastating consequences.

Moving closer to the Sun, the asteroid is passing by at less than three times the Moon's distance from us - just 830,000 kilometres (510,000 miles) away on 7 January, which is close in cosmic terms.

It is thought to be 300 metres in size - large enough to wipe out an entire country if it struck the Earth.

'Potentially hazardous'

2001 YB5 was discovered in early December by the Neat (Near Earth Asteroid Tracking) survey telescope observing from Mount Palomar in California, US.

Astronomers call it an Apollo object because it has a highly elliptical orbit that crosses the orbits of Mars, Earth, Venus and Mercury. It circles the Sun every 1,321 days.

Astronomers also add that it is "potentially hazardous", meaning there is a slim chance that it may strike the Earth sometime in the future.

As it approached the Earth, it was observed by the Klet Observatory in the Czech Republic by astronomers Jana Ticha and Milos Tichy, who tracked it on 5 January.

Such a "close encounter" is rare but not unprecedented. However, the only other known object that will come closer to the Earth is an asteroid called 1999 AN10, which will pass a shade closer on 7 August, 2027.

Widespread devastation

2001 YB5's brightness suggests it is a rocky body about 300 metres across.

If it struck the Earth a 300-metre object would not be a global killer: to wipe all life off the face of our planet an object would have to be about 1 km in size. But 300 metres is more than enough to cause widespread devastation.



There is nothing we could have done about it

Dr Benny Peiser
If it struck land, it would wipe out an entire country. If the impact point were London, then scientists estimate there would be total devastation for 150 km and severe destruction for a further 800 km, meaning that not only would the UK be destroyed but France and the Low Countries as well.

If it struck the ocean, the destruction would be more widespread. It would trigger tsunamis that would devastate most coastal cities.

Little warning

According to experts, the recent discovery and close approach of 2001 YB5 suggests that something nasty could creep up on us at any time.

Dr Benny Peiser of Liverpool John Moores University, UK, told BBC News Online: "The fact that this object was discovered less than a month ago leads to the question of if we would have had enough time to do anything about it had it been on a collision course with us.

"Of course the answer is no; there is nothing we could have done about it.

"It is a reminder of the objects that are out there. It is a reminder of what is going to happen unless we track them more efficiently than we do and make better preparations to defend our planet," says Dr Peiser.

Tuesday, January 8th 2002 - 06:44:03 PM
Name: oilcrisis
Comments:


The concept solar company from Greenpeace - on the web and on CD.
Have you ever seen a billboard telling you to switch on to solar? Have you
ever seen TV ads telling you that your own roof could be earning you money!
Why not? KPMG, the global business analysts say that solar can be competitive
now if it is mass produced (see the report below), but BP and Shell say
they won't mass produce solar panels because they won't be able to sell
them. Catch 22. So Greenpeace commissioned a marketing consultancy and asked
them how to create a market for low cost, roof-top solar power. Suntec is
what they came up with!

A blueprint to achieve 10% of the world's electricity from wind power by
2020
(Report by Greenpeace, European Wind Energy Association and Forum for Energy
& Development, October 1999)
Wind power today is a success story supplying electricity to millions of
people, employing tens of thousands of people and generating billions of
dollars revenue. The benefits of wind power are compelling; environmental
protection, economic growth job creation, diversity of supply, rapid deployment,
technology transfer and innovation. The fuel is free, abundant and inexhaustible.
Yet these benefits remain largely untapped; most energy decisions taken
today overlook wind power, and it faces many obstacles and barriers.
We have produced this report in order to update our understanding of the
contribution that wind power can make to the world. It is deliberately conservative.
The report is a practical blueprint to show that wind power is capable
of supplying 10% of the world's electricity within two decades, even if
we double our overall electricity use in that time. The collaboration of
our organisations highlights the triple benefits that wind energy offers
the world: for the environment, for industry and for development.

From Perennial Promise to Competetive Alternative
(KPMG report, commissioned by Greenpeace, September 1999)
As part of its drive to see fossil fuels phased out in favour of renewable
sources of energy in order to prevent further potentially disastrous climate
change, it is very important to Greenpeace that solar energy becomes widely
accepted and used. However, the big breakthrough for solar energy is still
to come. The predominant reason for this is the price of solar technology,
and so long as this remains high, solar energy will remain a perennial promise.
The extent to which market mechanisms could be used to rapidly produce a
competetive price for solar power via economies of scale is a question that
needs to be resolved.
The question Greenpeace put to KPMG was: "Can the large scale producton
of solar panels lower the price of solar energy to such an extent that solar
energy can compete economically with conventional forms of energy? And if
it can, what action is necessary on the part of government, customers and
industry to break through the current impasse?"
The conclusion from KPMG is clear: "Scaling up the production of solar panels
is technologically feasible using current technology. To achieve a reduction
in the price to the level of conventional energy, production needs to be
scaled up to 500 MWp per year. There are costs involved in creating the
required market size, and either industry, government, or energy users will
have to pick up the cost of transition."

Greenpeace Analysis of Future Independent Renewable Power Production in
the South East Asian Electricity Sector
(Greenpeace Report, July 1999)
In 1997, in Kyoto, Japan, the world agreed steps to address the problem
of climate change or global warming--caused largely by the accumulation
of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels.
The agreement struck in Kyoto required, rightly in Greenpeace's view, first
action to be taken by developed countries--those that have to date contributed
most of the carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. But developing countries will
also be required to address this issue sooner or later. Investments are
being made every day that lock countries into old-fashioned fossil-fuel
technologies. Every one of these decisions delays the transition to cleaner
energy systems, and guarantees the input of yet more carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere. The fossil fuel electricity sector will be expanding again
in the coming years, and the Asian region will be one of the biggest markets
worldwide.
Greenpeace analyzed the social, financial and economic experience of projects
for renewable energies in South-East Asia in 1998. The study paid special
attention to small, decentralized projects carried out in areas without
connections to the public main grid. This paper looks at the possibility
of installing a 'renewable power plant' of equal output in place of a planned
coal-fired power plant. Plans for both options are compared with regard to
the costs involved, and to the effect on jobs, the environment and the final
attainable electricity price which the independent power producer can offer
the grid operator. The economic and environmental advantages of plants based
on renewable energy and energy efficiency are highlighted with proposals
for 2 companies that will work closely together.

Greenpeace solar/wind projects around the world:
(For briefings on Greenpeace and energy issues in your own language, check
the climate pages on )
- May 1999 - Environmental organisations and renewable energy producers
have formed a coalition to campaign for a EU Renewable Energy Directive.
Currently, the European electricity market is significantly distorted to
the detriment of renewable energy generators. Regulation limits access to
the market for alternative energy sources. Nearly fifteen billion Euro's
in subsidies go to the conventional energy sector. This holds back the harnessing
of renewable energy in the European Union. Find out about Greenpeace's renewable
energy work in countries around Europe.



DO WE NEED TO GO TO WAR FOR OIL?
by David R. Henderson
David R. Henderson, formerly the senior energy economist with President
Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers, is an associate professor of economics
at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. The views expressed
in this briefing are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views
of the Naval Postgraduate School or of the U.S. Navy.

President Saddam Hussein of Iraq has no qualms about
torturing or even murdering innocent people. If he should
manage to hold on to Kuwait and to capture Saudi Arabia, he
would have access to even greater wealth than he has in
Iraq. No doubt, he would attempt to use that wealth to
strengthen his military, maybe even to speed up development
of nuclear weapons. Saddam could then be an even bigger
menace to peace in the Middle East than he was before he
invaded Kuwait.

But many Americans--including President Bush, Secretary
of State James A. Baker III, and former secretary of state
Henry Kissinger--believe that if Saddam succeeds in extend-
ing his control to a large part of the Arab world, he could
pose a direct threat to the United States by severely damag-
ing our oil-dependent economy. President Bush has stated
that his military action in the Persian Gulf is about "ac-
cess to energy resources that are key . . . to the entire
world." Bush claims that if Saddam gets greater control of
oil reserves in the Middle East, he can threaten "our jobs"
and "our way of life."[1] Baker claimed that Saddam, by
controlling much of the world's oil, "could strangle the
global economic order, determining by fiat whether we all
enter a recession, or even the darkness of a depres-
sion."[2] And Kissinger wrote that an unchecked Saddam
would be able to "cause a worldwide economic crisis."[3]

Bush, Baker, and Kissinger are mistaken. The annual
cost to the U.S. economy of doing nothing in the Persian
Gulf would be at most half of 1 percent of our gross nation-
al product, and probably much less. Saddam's vaunted "oil
weapon" is a dud.

Saddam cannot single-handedly cause shortages and gaso-
line lines. Only the U.S. government can do that. As long
as our government avoids imposing price controls, any cut-
back in supplies that Saddam causes will result in higher
prices, not shortages. That is the lesson to be learned
from the 1970s. Countries, including the United States,
that imposed price controls experienced shortages, and many
Americans were angry because they had to line up, Soviet
style, for gasoline.[4] Countries, such as West Germany,
that avoided price controls made it through the 1970s with
no gasoline lines.[5] That is no surprise. If govern-
ments let oil prices rise, people cut down on marginal uses
of oil but continue to use it where it is most valuable.
They take fewer trips to stores and fewer driving vacations,
for example, but continue to drive to work. People insulate
their houses and close off unused rooms. Airlines drop
marginal flights. Utilities switch from oil to coal and
natural gas when oil becomes too expensive. In 1973, the
last year of low oil prices, utilities in the United States
used 3.515 quadrillion Btu of oil. By 1983 they had reduced
their use of oil to 1.544 quadrillion Btu, a reduction of 56
percent.[6] Oil users make literally thousands of ad-
justments that--voila--cause the amount they consume to just
equal the amount supplied. The market works.

Of course, Saddam does not have to create gasoline
lines to hurt us. Simply by raising the price of oil, a
good we import in large quantities, he can hurt the U.S.
economy. But how much would a price increase hurt us?
Let's look at the numbers.

Take the worst case that has any plausibility whatso-
ever. Assume that Iraq not only holds on to Kuwait but also
is able to grab and keep Saudi Arabia and the United Arab
Emirates. Iraq would then control virtually all Middle
Eastern oil production except that of Iran. Those fields
had been producing about 12.3 million barrels per day (mbd)
before the price run-up in late July. But, although Saddam
may be evil, he is not stupid. He does not want to grab the
oil fields only to let them sit idle. He wants them so that
he can sell their oil. Saddam would surely continue to pro-
duce and sell oil from those fields if the U.S. government
and other governments let him. If he continued to sell 12.3
mbd, the effect of his actions on the world price of oil
would be zero. Oil would sell for the precrisis price of
about $20 per barrel.

However, Saddam would not necessarily sell the same
amount of oil. He would have a much tighter grip on the
OPEC cartel, whose members have kept oil prices low by pro-
ducing more than their agreed quotas. By controlling the
output of the four major cartel members, Saddam would gain
some degree of monopoly power and could use that power to
cut the combined production of the four members and drive up
the world price.

How much monopoly power would Saddam have? More than
he had, but not necessarily a lot. Remember that Saddam is
operating in a market in which world output is about 60 mbd.
A reasonable estimate, therefore, is that he would use his
newly acquired monopoly power to cut output from 12.3 mbd to
a minimum of 8.3 mbd, which is probably the profit-maximiz-
ing level of output.[7] That would amount to a 6.7 per-
cent cut in world output. Because, in the short run, demand
for oil is fairly inelastic, small cuts in production can
cause large increases in world prices. According to an
estimate by Derriel Cato of the U.S. Department of Energy's
Energy Information Administration, the short-run elasticity
of demand for oil is about -0.15.[8] In other words, a
10 percent increase in price causes a 1.5 percent decrease
in the quantity of oil demanded. Conversely, a 1.5 percent
decrease in supply causes a 10 percent increase in price.
With an elasticity of -0.15, a 6.7 percent cut in world
production causes about a 50 percent increase in price. The
precrisis price was $20 per barrel, so we can conclude that,
absent U.S. military intervention, the price of oil would
have risen to only about $30 per barrel.

How much would such a price increase cost the United
States? Before the crisis, we imported about 8 mbd. A
price increase would lead us to cut our imports as well as
our consumption and to increase our production. But assume
pessimistically--and contrary to common sense and evidence--
that we would continue to import 8 mbd. The cost of those
imports would then rise by $80 million per day, or $29.2
billion per year.

Twenty-nine billion dollars is not small change, but it
is only about half of 1 percent of our $5.4 trillion GNP. A
loss of half of 1 percent of GNP is surely not what Kissin-
ger had in mind when he referred to an "economic crisis."
The cost per American would be only about $112 per year. At
the gasoline pump, the cost would show up as an additional
24 cents per gallon. And that's on top of the old price of
about $1.09 per gallon, for a total of about $1.33, a bit
less than we're paying now.

Consider, by contrast, the costs of war. Sending troops
to the Persian Gulf has not been cheap. Secretary of
Defense Richard Cheney estimates that the cost of sending
extra troops to the gulf and keeping them there will total
$17.7 billion by the end of September 1991.[9] That is
in addition to our regular spending to protect the gulf,
Southwest Asia, and Northwest Africa, which one expert has
estimated at $46 billion in fiscal year 1990.[10] And
our military costs will get much higher, in money and lives,
if shooting starts. Some experts believe those costs could
reach $1 billion a day.[11] Remember also that added
military spending does not guarantee success. All it guar-
antees is our continued presence in the gulf.

Moreover, we can be sure that as a result of the U.S.
intervention, less oil will be produced--because the UN
embargo, enforced mainly by the United States, assures that
no Iraqi or Kuwaiti oil can be sold. With the embargo,
President Bush is keeping about 5 mbd of Iraqi and Kuwaiti
oil off the world market. Note the irony here. The alleged
purpose of U.S. intervention in the gulf was to preserve
"our jobs" and "our way of life" by keeping oil prices low.
But the one sure result of U.S. intervention is to keep them
high. President Bush is doing as a matter of policy what he
feared Saddam might do.

If we do go to war, oil production in the Middle East
is very likely to fall even further, sending prices even
higher. Bringing oil to the surface is difficult when guns
are being fired all around. In fact, the recent rise in oil
prices to $38 per barrel could well have been due to the
mere anticipation of an even smaller supply of oil if war
breaks out. If war became certain, the price of oil would
probably exceed $38 per barrel. Again, note the irony. By
doing nothing in the Persian Gulf, we can keep the price of
oil lower--$30 per barrel or less--than we can by doing
something. So a cost-benefit analysis that considers only
some of the costs of military action shows that military
action in the gulf is more expensive than inaction. Taking
the full cost of military action into account makes the case
for inaction even stronger.

Finally, all my estimates of the damage that Saddam can
do are for the short run. The annual damage he could in-
flict on us would get smaller the longer he restricted oil
production. As the price of oil increases, other oil pro-
ducers will produce more; indeed, that is already happening.
Moreover, according to energy economists Arlon R. Tussing
and Samuel A. Van Vactor, when the price of oil goes above
$20 per barrel, substitutes for oil--particularly natural
gas--become economically feasible. That is not just idle
speculation. According to Tussing and Van Vactor, there is
no large-scale use of petroleum liquids or of any other
primary fuel that cannot also be served by natural gas or
methane or other derivatives that can be produced at a com-
parable cost.[12] Even automobiles can run on alterna-
tive fuels. For instance, a substantial portion of the
taxicabs in Vancouver and Calgary run on liquid fuel derived
from methane, and a large fraction of cars in New Zealand
run on compressed natural gas--and their owners receive no
special subsidies or tax breaks. A conversion kit for an
automobile costs about $1,600, but the alternative fuel
costs are equivalent to 70 cents a gallon for gasoline.

Moreover, according to the Oil and Gas Journal, re-
serves of natural gas outside the United States and Canada
were equivalent to 80 years of production at the end of
1989. Throughout the 1980s, additions to natural gas re-
serves were three times annual production.[13] In
short, natural gas is a good substitute for oil, is already
being used as such, and is in abundant supply. Those facts
are presumably what have prevented the OPEC cartel from
raising the price of oil above $20 per barrel for more than
short periods of time in recent years. And none of those
facts change if Saddam replaces the Saudis as the dominant
actor in the OPEC cartel. His long-run interest, therefore,
is to sell the United States just enough oil to keep us from
making irreversible investments in alternative fuels. Who-
ever runs the cartel will not set the price much above $20
or will suffer as a consequence.

Whatever other justifications there may be for war with
Iraq, cheap oil is not one.


October 31, 1998
Geologists anticipate an oil crisis soon
By R. Monastersky
Cheap oil has helped fuel the economic boom of the 1990s. But petroleum
prices will jump drastically in the near future, as the world starts to
feel the pinch of tightening hydrocarbon supplies, according to several
forecasts.
Some see the shock coming in only a few years, while others put it off for
more than 2 decades. Nonetheless, these pessimistic predictions agree that
oil production will soon peak and then start sliding downward, even as demand
for oil continues to climb.
"For over 150 years, mankind has been used to an ever-growing supply of
cheap and abundant energy," says Colin J. Campbell, a former exploration
geologist now doing studies for Petroconsultants in Geneva. His analysis
calls for production to peak in less than a decade. "The implications of
this on industry, world politics, and economics seems to me to be enormous,"
he said this week at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America
in Toronto.
Campbell and his colleague at Petroconsultants Jean H. Laherrre reached
their conclusion by estimating the remaining underground reserves of so-called
conventional petroleum -- oil that is relatively easy to extract. Such oil
accounts for 95 percent of the 800 billion barrels of oil that the world
has burned thus far, says Campbell.
Going country by country, Campbell and Laherrre started with published tallies
of oil deposits and made adjustments in cases where industry data indicates
that nations had inflated their figures. Extrapolating from these numbers
and past oil-discovery rates, they estimate that roughly 1 trillion barrels
of oil remain in known and undiscovered fields.
Production will peak, they hypothesize, when the quantity of oil already
burned equals the amount yet to be extracted. They expect that point to
come within a decade but project oil prices to jump even sooner. The economic
impact will occur when nations in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries gain control of the market after production begins to drop outside
the Middle East.
When worldwide production starts falling, nations could tap into nonconventional
sources of oil, such as heavy oil, tar, and hydrocarbons locked in shales.
But these will cost more to extract and process, say the researchers.
Numbers only slightly more optimistic appeared in a March report by the
International Energy Agency in Paris, which estimates there are 1.5 trillion
barrels of conventional oil in reserves. The agency predicted that production
would peak before 2015, so by 2020, demand will exceed supply by 17 million
barrels a day.
At this week抯 meeting, John D. Edwards of the University of Colorado at
Boulder estimated that 2 trillion barrels of oil exist in known and undiscovered
fields. Though he pushes the production peak back to 2020, his result "should
urge us now to consider replacement energies."
Some energy analysts, however, dispute such worrisome forecasts. Thomas
S. Ahlbrandt of the U.S. Geological Survey in Denver, who leads an ongoing
federal effort to estimate global reserves, finds hope in new technologies
that allow companies to pursue oil in the deep sea and other areas previously
unexamined. "Since 1990, the area available for exploration has doubled
in the world."
Advances are also helping companies after they locate oil. Three-dimensional
seismic imaging has improved the mapping of fields, and whereas engineers
once bored only vertically through Earth抯 crust, they now can steer their
drilling, even horizontally.
In its 1998 International Energy Outlook, the U.S. Energy Information Administration
concluded that "technologies continue to evolve that significantly enhance
both exploration and production capabilities." It does not forecast production
to peak during the time frame of its analysis, which runs to 2020.
Economist Morris Adelman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology challenges
the practice of estimating oil reserves. "Nobody knows how much hydrocarbon
exists or what percentage of that will be recoverable," he says.
Judging from the histories of other geologic commodities, Adelman sees reasons
to expect an increasing petroleum supply. "The tendency to deplete [a resource]
is counteracted by increases in knowledge," he says.

Tuesday, January 1st 2002 - 06:32:35 PM
Name: midi
Comments:http://lwx1966.myetang.com/MIDI/midi.htm
Tuesday, January 1st 2002 - 05:03:36 PM
Name: here
Comments:here
Tuesday, December 18th 2001 - 07:29:52 PM
Name: here
Comments:here
Tuesday, December 18th 2001 - 07:28:33 PM
Name: cake
Comments:http://lwx1966.myetang.com/ruanjian.htm
Tuesday, December 11th 2001 - 06:51:29 PM
Name: look
Comments:http://www.yesho.com/mp3/film/honghushui/
Tuesday, December 11th 2001 - 06:36:52 PM
Name: look
Comments:http://www.hifi168.com/NEWDISC/amor-new.shtml
Tuesday, December 11th 2001 - 06:24:46 PM
Name: look
Homepage URL: http://studio.adobe.com/explore/gallery/mercermayer/page3.html
Comments:http://studio.adobe.com/explore/gallery/mercermayer/page3.html
Thursday, December 6th 2001 - 04:21:29 AM
Name: look
Comments:Midi to wave 可以用Wingroove打开后直接转城wav(用Reality也行)
Tuesday, December 4th 2001 - 08:26:20 PM
Name: have a look
Comments:http://www.kl.gz.cn/~dreamer/forum.htm
Tuesday, December 4th 2001 - 07:31:46 PM
Name: newghost
Comments:hi
Friday, March 9th 2001 - 05:37:12 PM
Name: 高行健
Comments:
          有只鴿子叫紅唇兒

            •高行健•

            作者的話

   這不是一部傳統章法的小說﹐雖然講述的也還是人的命運。
   小說有六個人物。一九五七年那個多事的夏天﹐快快﹑公雞和正凡都
中學畢業了﹐年齡最小的快快當時只有十六歲。還有三個女孩 子﹕燕萍﹑
肖玲和小妹。正像大部份男女孩子們一樣﹐他們相 愛﹐有過幸福﹐也經受
了痛苦。這都是一些非常真實的事﹐只不 過從痛苦中走出來的人們並不要
求在小說中看到完全的真實﹐於 是就把生活的真實裁剪為故事。到故事結
束的時候﹐春天和大地 上的希望已經復甦了﹐他們也大都人到中年﹐而不
幸的快快剛離 開了這個世界。肖玲則更早就告別了這曾經苦難的大地。然
而生 活並未終止。
  按照傳統的小說的章程﹐必須有一位主人公﹐ 那我們就不妨公推快
快﹐這位夭折了的天才。因此這又是一部關 於夭折了的天才的書﹐或者
說﹐是那個剛消逝的時代的悲劇。
  書中主要引用了六個人物他們自己的話﹐至於敘述者的一些 話以及敘
述者同人物的談話﹐倘讀起來覺得煩悶﹐儘可以跳過﹐ 作者應該尊重不同
的讀者的不同的興趣。

             敘述者的話

  你一定見過鴿子在晴空下盤旋吧﹖那是 很美的呀。在蔚藍色的天空
下﹐耀眼的陽光裡﹐你仰望一群鴿 子帶嗚嗚的風哨﹐從院子上空飛
過﹐又掠過比鄰的樓屋的屋 頂﹐消失了。空中依然回響嗚嗚的遠去了又
逼近了的風哨﹐一 群鴿子緊緊跟隨領頭的一隻﹐那最矯健﹑最敏捷的精
靈。還來 不及細看清它的神情﹐在令人振奮的鼓翼聲中﹐它們就又跟蹤消
失在屋脊後面。於是﹐又是嗚嗚的風哨﹐帶扑扑的鼓翼聲﹐在空中 長久
地迴旋……

            正凡的話

   我還在讀中學的時候﹐就喜歡養鴿子﹐鴿子是聰明的鳥兒﹐溫和的鳥
兒﹐很惹人喜歡。望它們在天上轉圈兒﹐甚至是一種享受﹐我 不知道你
有沒有這種體會。我可是從小就迷鴿子。我母親在世的 時候﹐總反對我養
鴿子﹐為了養鴿子﹐我同她大吵﹑大鬧過不知 多少回﹐也傷透了她的心。
她說我心思不用在讀書上﹐她一心希 望我考上個大學﹐她再苦也願意。老
實說﹐考上個大學﹐也不是 特難的事情。我真要下功夫的話﹐當然比不上
快快和公雞他們﹐ 他們兩個是班上的尖子。快快更是全校最拔尖的一個。
五七年全 市數學競賽﹐他拿了個第三﹐還漏了一道題沒做﹐印在捲子反
面﹐他當時沒看見。我不敢同他比﹐他那腦袋瓜才是真正做大學問的 人﹐
我沒法不服他。可惜呀……你看﹐它飛得多好﹗那翅膀多有 力﹐動作利
落﹐我講的是領頭的那鳥兒“紅唇兒"﹐它嘴上有那 麼個小紅疙瘩﹐等它
落下來的時候﹐你仔細看。你注意到吧﹖它 翅膀剪那麼兩下﹐別的鳥兒得
扑打三下。你看那紫斑飛得多笨﹐ 那隻白的﹐羽毛上帶點醬斑的﹐一歪一
歪的﹐不會平衡。鳥兒中 也有笨有聰明的。
  鴿子這種鳥﹐你要是養上了一對好種﹐就 會越來越多﹐起初我只養了
一對﹐後來就招來了三五隻﹐最多的 時候到二十來只。我母親就罵﹐哪來
這麼多米喂鴿子﹗我說﹐我 星期天揀破銅爛鐵賣去。不過﹐那時候人大
了﹐不好意思﹐怕同 學碰見﹐我就到城外東碼頭去攬零星小工﹐掙點錢買
碎米﹑雜荳 子。人要是在哪種事上了迷﹐想什麼法子也能辦到。那些年
月﹐生活儘管苦﹐我倒不覺得苦。我想﹐只要我中學畢業了﹐工作掙 錢
了﹐就能減輕母親的負擔﹐我也可以上夜大學進修。我不是只 笨鳥﹐也不
是個不好學習的人﹐我只是沒有快快﹑公雞他們那樣 的經濟條件﹐我當然
羨慕他們﹐可我不嫉妒。在我們男生中﹐朋 友間是不嫉妒的。我希望他們
能做出成就來。要不是後來那些年 胡搞亂搞﹐快快不會這樣早就死﹐公雞
也早就出成就了……
  還是講鴿子吧﹐你看﹐那紅唇兒﹐飛得多好﹐從你頭頂上過去像 一陣
風似的。我以前有只非常好的鳥﹐它那羽毛藍中透紫﹐紫得 發亮﹐像電鍍
過似的。腳上有三個圈﹐都是鴿子會得獎的標記。 有個禿頭出五十元錢﹐
我沒賣。六○年經濟困難的時候﹐叫個王 八蛋用汽槍打傷了﹐傷在小肚子
上﹐裡面有顆鉛子。我母親說﹐ 活不了幾天了﹐你乾脆殺了改善一下伙食
吧。我瞪了她一眼﹐後 來我把它在城外土崗子上埋了。那樣多鴿子也實在
養不起了﹐那 幾年你知道﹐人都沒吃的﹐一點爛菜幫子還撿了又撿。那些
鴿子 我一隻沒吃﹐全送人了﹐也不再問他們的下落。玩鳥的人是吃不下去
的。
  這些鴿子是我從牢裡放出來以後﹐在家養病等待落 實政策的這段時間
裡又養起來的。我愛人也不讓我養﹐我說﹐我 一不抽煙﹐二不喝酒﹐就這
是嗜好﹐你還嘮嘮叨叨﹐她也就再沒 吭過聲了。我愛人可是個很好的人﹐
不要為這種事同她計較。我 坐牢的時候﹐她為我吃了不少苦……你看﹐它
落下來了﹐就是徑 直落在籠子上的那隻﹗

            敘述者的話

  這確實是只非常精神的鳥兒﹐瞧它左顧右盼時的神情﹐多麼洒 脫。一
雙翅膀像劍一般收在兩側﹐它嘴上有一團殷紅的肉瘤﹐同 樣殷紅的腳趾輕
捷而分明地走細步。它望你的那副神情﹐目 不轉睛﹐那樣安祥。正凡
轉身去房裡抓了一把米﹐走到院裡﹐他 剛張開手掌﹐這鳥兒便翅膀一張﹐
輕巧地落在他手掌上。歇在屋 檐上的鳥兒都咕嚕起來了﹐他撒了些米在地
上﹐鴿子紛紛落在他 週圍﹐在他腳前腳後啄食。站在一群鴿子中間的正
凡﹐個子不 高﹐卻粗壯結實﹐額頭上已經有兩道分明的皺紋﹐喉嚨裡學
鴿 子鳴叫的咕嚕聲﹐卻又顯出幾分孩子般的天真。
  他是個鏜 工﹐專鏜汽車發動機的底盤。一個底盤有百來十斤重。因為
沒有 流水線﹐每加工一個都要上下搬動﹐沒有臂力和腕力是不行的。他
說﹐勞動競賽的時候﹐他做到超過定額兩倍多﹐沒人干得過他。 而目前他
們廠子裡沒有足夠的材料﹐分配的定額要他做的活﹐只 要四個小時就足夠
了。不過﹐他現在身體已經垮了﹐還像十多年 前那樣干是頂不下來的。他
在牢裡帶過好幾個月的手銬﹐把一隻 手從肩上反轉到頸後和另一隻手在身
背後銬在一起﹐一隻胳膊弄 脫臼了。可干些小件的活還是不成問題的﹐
車﹑鏜﹑銑﹑刨﹐哪 種機床他還都能看。問題是他七六年被捕還沒有組織
結論。為他 的事公雞找了燕萍﹐因為聽說燕萍的父親這回真的要恢復工作
了﹐可能還當他文化革命前市委書記的職務。
(待續)

一華 掃描輸入並校對
底本為春風文藝出版社1997年8月版《有只鴿子 叫紅唇兒》
(《名刊文庫──〈收穫〉選萃(1957-1997)》D 冊)
            公雞的話

  正凡不願意呆在家裡吃 勞保﹐他要工作。我說你急什麼﹖落得清閑。
我要的就是時間﹐ 可我沒時間。我倒是巴不得吃勞保﹐可我請幾天假都困
難﹐成天 編寫那種總結報告﹐鬼知道有什麼用處﹐沒有比浪費生命更痛苦
的事情了。當你明白你的生命是有用的﹐當你明白你的生命應該用在 什麼
事情上﹐當你明白而且堅信你做的事情是有益的﹐就沒有比 浪費你的時
間﹐白白蹧蹋自己的生命更使你痛苦不堪的事情了。 我今年已經三十七歲
了﹐如果我還能工作到六十歲﹐也只有二十 三年時間﹐而在正經的八小時
工作的時間裡﹐都要去編寫那種鬼 也不看﹐毫無實際用途的報告﹑小結﹑
總結﹑經驗﹑年報之類的 文字。今天要我寫個大批判材料﹐明天要我寫個
工業學大慶的典 型經驗﹐而全市供電卻嚴重不足。不錯﹐全市已經清查出
五十七 個緊跟“四人幫"和犯有嚴重錯誤的人﹐可拿稿子去念的人卻還
是天安門事件後親自指揮在全市進行大追查的“四人幫"的打 手。真正敢
于在白色恐怖下挺身反對“四人幫"的英雄﹐像正凡 這樣的﹐問題照樣掛
﹐不能回車間工作。沒有比寫這種報告更 無聊的事情了。我要的是時
間﹐快快要的是時問﹐我們都只能天 天開夜車到深更半夜﹐節﹑假日和星
期天幾乎從來沒休息過﹐而 那些屁事不做的人﹐他們都有的是時間。喝
茶﹐看報﹐扯淡﹐一 件雞毛蒜皮的事情﹐一句話就可以拍板的﹐都可以上
推下卸﹐掛 上十天半個月﹐甚至半年﹑一年的。我是搞文學的﹐一個民族
沒 有文學照樣可以生存。沒有文學死不了人﹐可物質的貧困﹐不按科學 辦
事﹐就要勒褲腰帶﹐口糧不足就瓜菜代。不尊重文學可以﹐不 尊重科學就
要受到歷史的懲罰。而受懲罰的不是不尊重科學的﹐ 竟然恰恰是搞科學的
人。快快死了﹐醫生說死于心臟病。我說他 死于這種政治﹐死于折騰我們
國家的那種“四人幫"的政治。 啊﹐又說到了他們﹐我說了不要再說這幫
王八蛋﹐好﹐不說﹐我 們談文學﹐談科學﹐談人﹐談談夭折了的快快。
  我同快快從 初中到高中﹐同學整整六年。我們是好朋友﹐我們無話不
談﹐即 使是在那些因為一句話被告發了就可以打成反革命的年代裡﹐我們
見面也可以毫無顧忌地發牢騷。在我們之間沒有什麼需要隱瞞 的﹐包括像
個人生活上最隱秘的感情﹐包括他的初戀。我們之間 是絕對相互信賴的男
子漢的友誼。現今有人把煙酒之交﹐你我之 間的相互利用﹑相互交換﹑相
互開後門的關係也叫做朋友﹐是對 這個美好的詞的褻瀆。
  我們曾經像討論科學一樣討論過愛 情。我們很想弄明白這種令人激動
而又神秘的感情﹐雖然那時候 我們誰也不懂得愛情﹐正像我們不懂得科學
一樣。

             敘述者的話

  快快同公雞說過﹐說他十歲的 時候就愛過一個女孩子﹐他說那是最純
粹的愛情。他還在上小學 六年級的時候﹐隨搬家﹐轉學到了另一所小
學。他和這個女孩 子當時分坐在同一張課桌椅上﹐他們兩個是班上成勣最
好的學 生。這個女孩子皮膚很白﹐舉止很文靜﹐當然也應該說長得很漂亮
……

            快快的話

  我﹐怎麼說 呢﹖說──是一種初戀吧﹖也許是。這是我最初愛上的一
個女孩 子。我無法形容她的美貌﹐她在我心中留下的印象﹐是那樣的寧
靜﹐那樣的耀眼﹔並不因為時間的消逝這種印象逐漸暗淡。她總是像 黎明
之前天邊上的啟明星﹐你只要見過一次﹐就會在記憶中永遠 保留那明亮的
印象。我不知道你有沒有過這樣的體會。
   在我上小學的時候﹐我每天早晨總希望能夠在路口──在我們那個去
學校的一個岔路口﹐她的家就在岔路口的那邊──看見她的身 影。我已經
說不出她那時經常穿的一件是什麼顏色的衣服﹐可我 總覺得﹐無論什麼時
候﹐只要一見到她的背影﹐我就能辨認出 來。她梳兩條長長的辮子……
可是說來也覺得好笑﹐我從來沒 有敢在路上招呼過她。當她走在前邊的時
候﹐我便默默地跟在後 面﹐或者迅速地趕上前去超過她。可當她走在我後
面的時候﹐我 便會放慢腳步﹐等她走過來。但是﹐當她走到身邊的時
候﹐我 可決不敢回頭去看她一眼或者對她說句話﹐哪怕是笑一笑﹐卻讓她
從我身邊走過﹐仿彿我毫不在意似的。每天上學的時候﹐我差不 多都這
樣﹐希望碰到她﹐卻又不敢對她說一句話。可在學校的教 室裡﹐我們同一
張課桌﹐坐的是同一條板凳﹐情況就不一樣了。 我們也說話﹐毫無顧忌﹐
還互相借用鉛筆。我記得有一次正在考 試﹐我鉛筆芯突然斷了。我忘了帶
鉛筆盒﹐書包裡翻來翻去就只 有這一支筆。她仿彿覺察到了﹐把放在課桌
上面她的鉛筆盒悄悄 地朝我這邊推過來。我看了她一眼﹐她卻仍然低頭
在做她的試 題。我從她的鉛筆盒裡拿起一支她削得尖尖的筆──她的鉛筆
都 削得那麼尖﹐削得那麼細﹐這是我們男孩子無法相比的。一切都修飾 得
那麼整潔﹐就像她那個人一樣。她有一副很明亮的嗓子。聽她 說話的時
候﹐你覺得是一種愉快﹐我非常愛她的聲音。老師叫她 起來回答問題的時
候﹐我有時候發現﹐我並沒有在聽她回答的是 什麼﹐卻在聽她的聲音。她
說得一口非常標準的北京話。在我們 班裡﹐能夠說那麼標準的北京話的﹐
只有她一個。而我可以算是 半個。所以班上的同學把我們都叫做“北京
人"。同學們這樣叫 我們﹐我不明白是不是含有一種嘲弄的意味﹐一種羨
慕的意味﹐ 或者是一種孩子氣的惡作劇。總之﹐聽見叫我們“北京人"的
時 候﹐我和她﹐誰都不答理。可是從心底﹐我卻感到這個稱號給人一種 溫
暖﹐把我同她仿彿聯繫起來了﹐又覺得是一種幸福。我們班的 男女孩子之
間﹐也許是到了這樣的年齡﹐也許是我們所處的那種 社會環境﹐男女同學
之間﹐在公開的場合﹐界限划得非常分明。 為了打消這種隔閡﹐老師安排
同學的座位﹐總是讓一個男同學和 一個女同學合坐在一塊。可是﹐男女孩
子們之間﹐卻仍然存在 相互隔閡的感覺。尤某是男孩子們﹐特別要故意
強調這種隔閡。 所以在許多同學的課桌上﹐都畫一條分明的界限﹐男同
學和女 同學誰也不許超過。唯獨我們的桌子和板凳﹐從來也沒有用粉筆或
小刀子畫過一條分界線。在我們相處的那個學年裡﹐從來沒有發 生過任何
爭執﹐可也沒有更多的接觸。除了在課堂上和課間休息 的時候﹐有時交換
過那麼幾句話。
  有一次﹐我發現在她 的鉛筆盒裡﹐有一張淺綠色的小卡片。我便問
她﹐能不能給我看 一看﹖她向我笑了笑﹐說你喜歡我就給你。我很長的時
間一直珍 藏這張卡片﹐以後卻不知被我收藏到哪兒去了﹐再也找不到
了。第二天﹐我從家裡帶來一顆通紅的彈子──是我收集的一盒子彈 子中
最漂亮的一顆。它紅得像瑪瑙﹐沒有一點損傷﹐我從來捨不 得投擲。只是
在盤弄我的彈子的時候﹐拿出來賞玩。這是我的那 一盒子彈子中的一顆
“皇后"﹐或者說一個“公主"。小的時 候﹐你一定聽過白雪公主和七個
矮人的故事吧﹖我的彈子就好比 這些矮人中的那位公主﹐我把它送給了
她。
  小學畢業 了。投考中學的時候﹐這之前﹐我們便再也沒有見過面。我
考上 了附中﹐而她後來考上了女一中。這是在兩年後我才知道的﹐因為我
上學的路線變了。路上﹐我再也沒有見到過她。我再見到她的時 候﹐是我
在初二﹐暑假的時候﹐全市組織了少先隊夏令營﹐那是 一個非常愉快的夏
天。在夏令營裡﹐我們睡在帳篷裡﹐有篝火晚 會﹑游泳﹑爬山比賽﹑講故
事……那是無懮無慮的年代﹗就在那 次夏令營的篝火晚會上﹐大家都聚集
在草坪上。這是一片非常平 坦﹐又長得很茂盛的﹑剪修得很整潔的草坪。
現在是很難見到這 種草坪了﹐即使原先保養得很好的草地﹐不是變得光禿
禿的﹐就 是雜草叢生。可那片草坪用軋草機推得整整齊齊。篝火在湖邊上
點了﹐孩子們那個高興勁﹗音樂聲起來了﹐大夥兒跳集體舞。男 女孩
子們混雜在一起﹐手拉手﹐一圈在外面﹐一圈在裡面﹐突 然裡圈跟上來
了一個女孩和我並排﹐我面對她的時候﹐發現正 是她﹗還是那雙長長的
辮子。她長高了﹐更漂亮了﹐還是那副寧 靜﹑悠嫻的樣子。她手上捏一
塊小手帕﹐當我們應該拉手的時 候﹐她發現手上還捏那塊小手帕﹐朝我
抱歉似地笑了笑﹐立刻 把手帕換到另一隻手上﹐於是﹐我們手拉手跳完
了這支曲子。 當時﹐我覺得這個曲子是那麼長。那麼值得你去品味。另一
支樂 曲又響起來了﹐她已經轉到我前面去了。我看見她用手帕擦她的額
頭﹐擦鼻子。我們相距便越來越遠了。夏令營裡﹐我們也還有 幾次機會
在路上相遇。我和我們男同學在一起﹐她和她的女伴們 在一起。我們仍然
沒有交談過一句﹐只不過互相望瞭望﹐好像連 表示一個笑意﹑打個招呼也
不曾有過。可是我覺得﹐她認識我﹐ 我所要迴避的仿彿也恰是她要迴避
的。這樣又過了幾年﹐再也沒 有遇到。
  在高中畢業之前﹐我又見到過她一次。她騎了輛自 行車﹐背上背了架
手風琴﹐從我身邊一越而過。可是我立刻意識 到這就是她﹐雖然這時候她
已經完全是個大姑娘﹐兩條辮子更長 了。我望她的背影過去﹐我堅信那
就是她﹐我所以說我見到的 是她﹐因為在團市委舉辦的畢業生晚會上﹐有
一個節目──手風 琴獨奏。她走上臺來﹐背手風琴﹐坐在台中央﹐我一
眼就認出 來了﹐是她﹗那天晚上﹐她演奏了一個非常熱烈的曲子﹐可惜的
是﹐我沒有記住這個樂曲的名字。之後﹐我再也回憶不起來是一個什 麼曲
子了。總之﹐我覺得那是熱情的﹑奔放的﹐正像她本人一 樣。當然﹐她在
臺上﹐我在臺下﹐她並不知道我在場。這就是我 們最後的一次見面。以
後﹐我不知道她是否還在這個城市。你問 我當時為什麼不去找她。打聽她
的下落﹖說來你一定要笑話﹐因 為連她的名字我都不知道。我的記憶中﹐
她同我只有一個共同的 名字“北京人"。當然﹐在小學的時候我知道她叫
什麼﹐可是多 少年過去了﹐我沒有留意她的名字﹐也沒有記下她的名字﹐
也不 曾去找過她。你也知道﹐我是一個在這方面非常拘謹的人。好像總也
沒有時間去考慮﹐在這上面耗費更多的精力。我總是匆匆忙忙地 生活﹐生
怕浪費掉一丁點時間。

             敘述者的話

  快快和公雞上大學以後﹐有年暑假回來探親﹐他 們一起在公雞家的小
閣樓上﹐談到了愛情。快快向公雞講述了他 的初戀。而公雞卻嘲笑了他的
這種愛情。他認為﹐這只不過是少 年時一種憧憬﹐並不是真正的愛情。

             公雞和快快的對話

  公雞認為﹕愛情應該是火熱的。它燃燒 你﹐使你無法擺脫﹔它激勵
你﹐令你苦苦追求﹔並且給你的事 業帶來一種精神的奮發。愛情既是精
神的﹐又是可以感觸的。
  快快問公雞﹕如果你愛一個人﹐可以吻她嗎﹖
  公雞 笑說﹕你這個傻瓜﹗如果你愛她﹐你就應該去吻她。誰像你這
樣談戀愛呢﹖你這純粹是柏拉圖式的﹗
  快快說﹕這樣不會影 響學習嗎﹖如果像這樣愛的話﹐那還怎麼把自己
全身心投進科學 中去呢﹖
  公雞說﹕關鍵是看你找到的是否是你理想中的愛 人。一個科學家應該
找一個他終身事業的伴侶。她應該理解你﹐ 支持你的事業﹐這是愛情的前
提。如果你所愛的人﹐她不愛你的 事業﹐這樣的愛情不可取。
  快快問﹕能找到這樣的人嗎﹖她 能完全理解你嗎﹖她能完全理解科學
嗎﹖女孩子﹐老實說﹐她們 的腦袋瓜子不是生來搞科學的。
  公雞說﹕你不能要求一個女 孩子憧你的科學﹐只要她理解你﹐信任
你﹐相信你所從事的事業 是崇高的﹐這就夠了。
  快快沉思了一會兒說﹕你的話是對 的。
  公雞問﹕你有女朋友了﹖
  快快嘆了口氣說﹕可 我不知道她對我到底怎麼看。
  公雞又問﹕是你同班同學﹖
  快快神色憂鬱地回答說﹕我們同一個系的﹐比我低一年級﹐ 她叫燕
萍。
一華掃描輸入並校對
底本為春風文藝出版社 1997年8月版《有只鴿子叫紅唇兒》
(《名刊文庫──〈收穫〉 選萃(1957-1997)》D冊)

            燕萍的話

  我總覺得他還是個孩 子。他頭髮總是亂糟糟的﹐從不梳一梳﹐可是很
纖細﹐像女孩子 的頭髮絲樣的。我沒有他的照片﹐說來你也許不相信﹐他
從未給 過我一張。我愛他﹐不明白為什麼﹐這是說不清楚的。你如果真愛
上了誰﹐我相信你也說不清為什麼愛。這不是數學﹐愛情是無法 計算的。
我並沒有想到愛他﹐愛他是非常痛苦的事……
   我向他請教過一道函數習題﹐只因為有了這道習題﹐我們才有了接
觸。他說他早就認識我﹐因為我批判過他。有這麼回事﹐那時候 我剛進大
學不久﹐學校裡批判“白專"道路﹐他在系裡是“只專 不紅"的典型。我
代表我們新入學的同學﹐作了個發言﹐可那時 候他什麼模樣我都不知道。
他當時肯定也在會場上。後來我才知 道﹐開大會的時候﹐他總是遲到﹐躲
在會場最後哪角落裡﹐也許 就是那次批判大會以後他養成的習慣。可他在
系裡的同學們中間 挺有名氣﹐因為他學習特別好。有一次﹐在去食堂的路
上﹐我們 都吃完了飯﹐他才挎個書包﹐挾飯盒子﹐低頭﹐迎面匆匆
趕來﹐要不是我們讓開路﹐他差點碰我﹐同我擦肩而過。我們班上 的幾
個女生都笑了﹐說﹐就是那個書獃子。他那時候﹐還像個中 學生﹐一個很
不顯眼的男孩子。要不是這樣﹐我也不會去向他請 教。平時﹐我不同男同
學往來﹐免得招惹閒話。我覺得我比他 大﹐雖然﹐我們同年﹐他還比我大
好幾個月。他坐在閱覽室窗 前﹐背陽光﹐一頭亂糟糟的頭髮在陽光中那
麼纖細﹐細得仿彿 透亮似的。那次以後﹐我時常去問他功課﹐一起談學
習﹐談科 學﹐並沒想到會產生那種感情。他也很單純﹐甚至津津有味地同
我談他同他的好朋友公雞在高中一年級的時候﹐就墨水瓶子的顏色進 行過
的爭論﹐我不記得公雞是否還記得。可我就喜歡他對科學的 那種熱情﹐也
許就是這種熱情吸引了我……

             敘述者的話

  公雞當然記得那次爭論﹐他說那是在 快快家裡﹐他們一起在做功課﹐
快快用鋼筆吸墨水的時候﹐突然 提出了這個問題。
  “你說這個瓶子裝的是藍墨水還是紅墨 水﹖"
  “當然是藍墨水﹐"公雞說。
  “不對﹐也許 它既不是紅顏色的﹐也不是藍顏色的。它只不過是種誰
也不知道 的什麼顏色。可是由于我們見到這種色時﹐大家都說它是藍的﹐
實際上我所看到的和你所看到的那個瓶子的顏色﹐雙方是無法溝通 的。只
不過﹐由于共同的語言﹐從你童年起﹐當引起你這種印象 的時候﹐人們總
稱之為藍顏色﹐於是你就也把你所得到的這種印 象的顏色也稱之為藍顏
色﹐可它究竟是什麼顏色﹐誰也無從知 道。"
  公雞沉思了一會兒說﹕“這就是說﹐這墨水瓶子和墨 水的顏色﹐實際
上是不可知的。僅僅是由于語言的關係﹐給了它 一個大家所通用的詞﹐才
把各自的認識﹐通過這個詞溝通起來。 這不就是不可知論嗎﹖這應該是一
個哲學問題。"
  快快 說﹕“不﹐這同時也是一個科學問題。"
  他們沉默了。
  “聽﹐貝多芬的D大調﹗"公雞說。
  收音機裡正播送貝 多芬的D大調小提琴協奏曲。快快把旋鈕轉到了最
大音量﹐他們 便立刻淹沒在音樂的洪流中。琴弦上那個熱情的主題在各種
器樂 的交響中﹐痛苦地﹑執拗地重複……快快家有一部留聲機﹐他們經
常放的就是這個D大調。公雞說﹐那套唱片已經磨損得失去了光 澤﹐可唱
針的沙沙作響卻湮滅不了這股音響的洪流。墨水瓶子的 爭論喚起了那種懷
疑的痛苦之後﹐從收音機裡又聽到了這個熟悉 的旋律﹐它在你的心上敲打
﹐搏擊﹔它詢問﹐它追求﹐它要 在否定之後去重新達到肯定﹐這是懷
疑的苦惱和將要獲得的自信 的甘甜之間的搏斗﹔它在你心上敲打﹐搏擊
﹐它震撼你的 靈魂﹐那個熱情的主題﹐要證實自身的價值﹔就是它﹐
就是這個 逐漸強大的旋律﹗我同意公雞的話﹐這個旋律就是快快﹐快快離
開了人世﹐可貝多芬的這個主題卻是不朽的……
  快快和公雞 他們就這樣走過了自己的少年時代。在科學上如同在愛情
上一 樣﹐探索那不可知的領域。但是愛情畢竟更容易感知﹐公雞朦朦朧
朧地愛上了肖玲。公雞高中畢業那年﹐肖玲正初中畢業﹐女孩子 在愛情上
比男孩子成熟的要早。他們的愛情可以追溯到一九五七 年那個新年晚會
上。

            肖玲的話

  我那次就愛上你了﹖你真壞﹗我對你那時候還沒一點印象﹐我根 本沒
有注意到你﹗新年晚會上﹐羅老師扮的新年老人多逗。棉花 做的那麼大的
鬍子﹐戴一頂尖尖的老高老高的帽子﹐還貼了好 多飄帶﹐紅﹑黃﹑藍﹑
綠各種顏色的綵帶一直拖到地上。他走進 禮堂的時候﹐同學們都一起叫
呀﹐笑呀﹐那時候我哪裡注意到你 了﹖我根本沒有注意到你。他從禮堂門
口進來﹐徑直走上舞台 說﹕“同學們﹐我給你們帶來了新年禮物。我祝福
你們又長大了 一歲﹐可我只是更老了﹐但我並不悲哀﹐我希望看到你們快
快長 大﹐將來為人民做出貢獻﹐你們之中將會出現科學家﹑音樂家﹑文學
家﹐也許會有同學成為奧林匹克運動會上未來的冠軍﹐還會有許 許多多的
先進工作者﹐出席全國的群英大會。那時候﹐我就是再 衰老﹐我心裡也是
高興的呀﹗你們說不是這樣嗎﹖"你看多逗﹗ 大家都猜是誰﹖可當時誰也
猜不出來。他把嗓子壓得那麼低﹐後 來他把鬍子一除﹐摘下帽子﹐﹗你
瞧大家那個熱鬧的勁呀﹗都 喊﹕“羅成老師﹗羅成老師﹗"這小老頭多有
意思﹐真是個老小 孩子。
  那時候我才沒有注意到你呢﹗我笑得連腰都直不起來 了。後來音樂開
始了﹐新年舞會多熱鬧呀﹗唉﹐我真希望再過一 個那樣的新年。可以後﹐
在大學裡這些年﹐卻再也沒有這樣的舞 會了。你說﹐是我叫你跳的﹖你這
個人真賴皮﹗明明是大個子﹐ 你們班的文娛委員走到我跟前來說﹕“你為
什麼不帶他跳一個 呢﹖他也想學跳舞。"他就把你推到我跟前。我說﹕
“好吧﹐我 教教你。"我帶你﹐可你多笨﹐連節奏都踩不准﹗這種舞可
是 最簡單不過了﹐我一看就會。你問我參加過多少次舞會﹖我告訴你 吧﹐
除了在我們班上女生之間一起跳﹐我還從來不參加舞會呢﹗ 這是我第一次
參加舞會。我不跟大男生跳舞﹐整個晚會我都是跟 我們女生跳的﹐誰讓你
插進來了﹖當然﹐我還是很喜歡你的。你 窘得耳根都紅了﹐我好意思不帶
你跳嗎﹖那時候我無懮無慮﹐可 真沒有想到愛你﹐我只覺得挺好玩的。新
年都過了﹐你在路上突 然塞給我一張賀年片﹐你說是誰﹖是你追求我﹐要
不﹐我心裡根 本沒有你。你生氣了嗎﹖別這樣﹐我是愛你的﹐真的﹐愛
你。你 就是這樣闖進我的生活中來了。可當時﹐我並沒有意識到這就是令
人痛苦的愛情。我們為什麼要愛呢﹖

             公雞的話

  愛情萌發于一種無條件的絕對的信任﹐而再要 好的朋友也並不總能達
到這種極點﹐這就是友誼與愛情之間的分 界吧﹖
  春天來了﹐臨近畢業﹐忙於準備高考。我第一次面臨 對生活道路的
選擇。我和快快﹐我們是從來不屈服于命運的。 是我們自己選擇了自己的
道路﹐哪怕再艱難﹐我們也得一直走下 去﹐因為這畢竟是我們自己選定
的。
  我和快快從初中的 時候﹐就喜歡數學﹐喜歡物理﹐喜歡自然科學。我
們也喜歡音 樂﹐不過誰也沒有想成為個音樂家。可我們都誇過海口﹐要成
為 像牛頓﹑愛迪生和愛因斯坦那樣的大科學家。同時﹐我又愛好文學﹐ 偷
偷地寫詩﹐也想成為個詩人。後來﹐我發現歷來的大詩人都是 飽經痛苦
的﹐而我們的時代太平靜﹐大幸福了﹐我們的國家又在 建設中﹐一切都有
待我們去創造﹐還是科學家大顯身手的時代。 於是﹐中學畢業的前一年﹐
我和快快就在一起準備高考了。
  我們買了各種數學競賽的試題和從舊書店收羅來的紙都發黃了的 各種
難題解﹐也開始啃微積分。因為功課好﹐老師對我們甚至都 有些偏愛。有
時﹐明明看見我們並沒有聽課﹐卻在那裡演算什麼 難題﹐也聽之任之。
  到了畢業前的最後一個學期﹐我記得那 是開春之後﹐教室外面﹐滿校
園都飄的是柳樹的花絮。白楊樹的 新葉像碧綠的緞子一樣﹐在令人發睏的
陽光下閃爍。那是一節數 學課。快快遞給我一道習題。這是一道看來似乎
非常簡單的幾何 題。圓中間有一個三角﹐大約是要求求證一條什麼定理。
整整一 節課﹐我不停地畫來劃去﹐用去了好幾張紙﹐仍然沒有找到答案。
又持續了一節課﹐我的思路已經枯竭了。柳樹的花絮從窗外飄了 進來﹐在
我們課桌上滾成絨毛般的一團。我一吹﹐它們又騰起飛 散開來……我突然
覺得解這樣的習題多麼枯燥乏味﹐而我一輩子 將要同無窮無盡的這樣的難
題打交道﹐把自己禁閉在試驗室和書 本裡﹐這將是惱人的。我撂下筆﹐凝
望窗外﹐迷漫在陽光下的 是點點柳絮﹐而碧綠得透明的楊樹葉閃緞子
一般的光澤﹐招惹 我。我覺得我的秉性並不適于搞科學。我醒悟到我愛
春天﹐愛 生命的氣息﹐愛生活勝過於書本和那些抽象的思維邏輯。下課鈴
響了﹐我一個人默默地走出了教室﹐躲開了快快﹐到操場旁邊的小樹 林
裡﹐踱來踱去。
  上課鈴響了﹐我回到教室﹐把習題交 給快快說﹕
  “這道題我不解了﹐以後我再對你說。"
   他詫異地看了我一眼﹐因為我們從來沒把對方出的題目原封不動地 退
回去。
  整整一個下午我沒有和快快說一句話。一上完 課﹐我就到圖書館去
了﹐圖書館專為住校的畢業班的同學開闢了 一間準備高考的復習閱覽室﹐
是低年級同學不能進去的。閱覽室 裡很清靜。我在閱覽室裡隨手翻翻往年
的高考復習提綱和各高等 學校的專業介紹﹐這我都很熟悉了。我轉了%B

Sunday, October 15th 2000 - 09:17:44 PM
Name: 新鬼
Comments:19世紀中葉澳洲女性移民可謂奇貨可居。
因為嚴重缺乏女性﹐英國政府於1834年推出澳洲女性移民計劃。
來澳洲尋工或找老公的許多女性移民固然並非個個體面﹕她們當中有
酒鬼﹐有妓女﹔有從救濟院出來﹐有從牢獄出來。但從
STRATHFIELDBAYE來到HOBART 的這286名女移民﹐絕大多數都有著理
想的人格﹐衹是她們也難免時不時遭受些意外的禮遇。
一位觀察家曾這樣寫道﹕“她們在家打扮入時穿著優雅﹐但在公共場
合﹐她們常常一路聽著從無賴之徒們口裡出來的極其下流粗俗的語言
"。
觀察家繼續寫道﹐“任何一位稍有羞怯之心的女子﹐都會覺得這是一
種最可怕的作賤"。
據形容﹐當時這批女性移民個個都哭得很辛酸﹐其中有一位還“當場
昏死過去"。

Saturday, October 7th 2000 - 04:41:49 AM
Name: 芖ㄐ
Comments:ρㄠ笴穝碍褐窖ㄆ抖
Thursday, October 5th 2000 - 03:20:27 AM
Name: 穝碍
Comments:瞦ガ┪踌焊街讽匡
Wednesday, October 4th 2000 - 03:51:38 AM
Name: 紫薇
Comments:
踩脚印!
Tuesday, October 3rd 2000 - 12:40:22 AM
Name: 穝碍痙ē
Comments:舧
Monday, October 2nd 2000 - 12:11:34 AM
[ Sign my Dreambook | Back to kanglyer ]

This Dreambook brought to you by
New Dream Network, Dreamhost, and Dreamservers.