Want to submit a letter?
Just click here.
Not all letters are selected for posting.
|
|
"And for all of you out there who keep wondering why your letters haven't been posted: Simple.
We get thousands. It's impossible to post every one. We do the best we can."
|
|
|
 |
 "For the record, Shannon Tweed is her own person. She doesn't need me or any man to define who she is. She is not "my girl" as in "my car, my house.. etc" and finally, she is not my partner. Don't want partners. She is her own person."
Why are you so damn scared of letting Shannon be PART of your life?? It seems that every time someone tries to speak of you two as "Gene and Shannon" you freak out. You make it sound like the two of you are just roommates (housemates?) who happen to share the same bed ... and have two children.
Elaine Manning, Las Vegas
Response from Gene:
You are lost in the past. Your view of women is archaic and outdated. At least that's what I'm led to believe by Feminism: equal access to power, equal opportunity... equality. What you want is to be a PART (like Adam's Rib) of a man.
Man doesn't want to be a Part of woman (you).
Time to grow up. Welcome to the 21st Century.
Hey Gene
 I was just wondering, did you get the title "Carnival of Souls" from Herk
Harvey's macabre masterpiece from 1962?
Best regards
Pal Anders Dramstad
Response from Gene:
Yes.
Dear Gene,
 You have said you're a Beatles fan, have you ever met any of the bands members?
I visited the genesbedtimestory site you have linked to your site-
WHEW- Hot- Hot- Hot.
It,s a great place to stir up brand new fantasies!! Lots of fun for the ladies !! Gene you know you have many women lusting after and fantasising about you, but I donít know if you realise just how many are out there !
Great to hear Adelaide has been included in your trip to Australia.It is often missed out by many top bands and shows. I was prepared to travel to another state and wait in line for hours anyway, theres no way I would miss out on the chance to meet you.
Gene, am loving the site and the letters.
Lisa ,you have a job to die for.
Thanks
Deb F
P.S. In the eyes of the law Gene you are seen as married and therefore you would PAY.
Response from Gene:
Thanks for the kind letter. But, you're not qualified to say much about "the law" and whether or not the law considers I would have to pay. For the record, I have a COHABITATION AGREEMENT. Go talk to your lawyer. He'll tell you about PRENUP AGREEMENTS and the Cohab Agreement I mentioned. Cohabs supercede trials and juries. It's an agreement by both of what would happen when (not if) we split. Perhaps Aussie law is different... but I doubt it's different by much.
Again, you're not qualified to make a legal assessment. The rest of the letter was enjoyable.
Hi Gene
 When I was 10 years old (1973) my father past away my mom could not handle it she got a boyfriend and moved in with him she came by once a month and paid rent got me some food at del taco then I was on my own the rest of the month I went to school because there was food but most of the time I got food from the trash can at the apartments I lived in. It was tough being alone But I had my KISS records I played fake drums or air bass I had dreams of meeting you at a concert I don't think I would have made it with out you guys and you most of all. You were and are my hero. I finished School and I have an Associate degree as a paralegal I'm a father of six children that I'm raising myself my wife is not with us anymore and I'm disabled. with all the bad thing and good that's happened to me "YOU" Gene have helped me though. I enjoy reading the letters people send and your answers. I just wanted to thank you. You will never know what you mean to me.
YOUR FAN - JOHN -
P.S. I'm glad you take the time to read our letters to you THANKS
 I remember when I was 7 years old in 1978, I got my membership card for The Kiss Army out of a cereal box. My mother freaked out and told me I would go to Hell if I listened to your music. I am 31 years old now and I am not in Hell, althought Alabama seems like it during the summer. I still carry the torch. Aside from the music and the super stardom I have to take my hat off for keeping it alive. I read that a Kiss appearance had to be canceled because Paul had to have hip surgery. My grandmother had to do the same thing. No one likes the idea of getting older but to still be able to listen to The Greatest Band In The World is a treat for me and always will be. I just bought the box set and I own a bar where I live. I play it all the time. People that are significantly younger than me really enjoy it. Kiss will always be a part of my life and my wife has become a fan as well. I just wanted to say thank you to you as well as Paul, Ace, Peter. It was also a tremendous challenge for all of the other musicians that helped keep the dream alive when you guys had your differences. Again, thank you.
Deron McMichael
Tuscaloosa AL
Gene:
 Philosophically speaking you kind of remind me of Aliester Crowley. You know the "do what though wilt" "seize your true will" thing? I know you dont use drugs or believe in god but are you familiar or influenced at all by him? Just curious. I get a kick out of him.
Mark
Response from Gene:
Crowley was a nut job. He was a curious and well educated man who believed in strange notions. Supernatural notions. I don't buy it.
Dear Gene
 I am 13 years old and i am one one of the biggest KISS fans.I saw KISS 4 times on the farewell tour.I wanted to tell you that that was the most kick ass concert ive ever been to.KISS puts on an awesome show everytime i see them.I also saw KISS on the ALIVE WORLDWIDE tour 3 times all of them at The Great Western Forum. those 3 shows were also kick ass.My mom took me to all 7 of the concerts i went to.im really dissapointed that KISS wont be going on another tour.Well Gene its been nice talking to you even if you dont post this can you please write back.
Your Biggest Fan
ARA KOKSHANIAN
Hey, Gene-
 Some random thoughts relating to the budding Evolution/Creationism debate.
Your thoughts would be appreciated:
In Genesis, YOWM, the Hebrew word commonly translated as "day" (as in "the first day," "the second day," and so on) has many meanings, one of which is "age." Thusly, the entire Creation account can be read as taking place over the course of AGES, not days. (In fact, that's likely the way that it should be translated, just as "Thou shalt not kill" should read "Thou shalt nor murder" and "Red Sea" should be "Sea of Reeds.")
My point: this ancient text, considered a fairy tale by many enlightened folks, is the earliest writing to state that the Earth and the universe is, in fact, ancient.
How did the oral traditionalists and, eventually, the writers of the Pentateuch, know this?
Look a little deeper, and you'll see that the Bible describes the Earth as a "circle" that God "hangeth upon nothing".
Go even further, and you'll see that Genesis clearly states that the Earth originally had ONE land mass, a land mass that was eventually broken apart. Science calls this Pangea, the supercontinent, a supposedly new discovery.
How then, without the benefit of satellite imaging and knowledge of plate-tectonics, did the writers of the Bible know this?
Regarding Evolution: read up on Macro-Evolution (species-to-species evolution) vs. Micro-Evolution (changes WITHIN a species). You'll find that the former has not been proven or observed, but the latter has. For more on this, I suggest a book called "Darwins Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution," by Michael J. Behe. Read about Irreducible Complexity- it's fascinating.
Also, you mentioned Carbon dating. It's effective, but by no means a perfect process. Multiple tests by multiple scientists on the same subject have often produced wildly varied results, and rocks newly produced in volcanic eruptions have been dated as being millions of years old.
That's enough for now. I look forward to reading your thoughts.
Best,
RJ Sevin
Response from Gene:
I am one of the people of the Book -- my people were responsible for the Bible. However, don't delude yourself. The Old Testament is not an "original work." It was pieced together from other "creation" stories... The Gilgamesh Epic predates the Biblical Flood.,, if you can ask questions about the ancient Hebrews and how they "knew" about the original "great landmass"... how about the Inca and their Astronomical calendar... or the Druids of England and Stonehenge... and the Egyptians and their Pyramids...
Point being, anytime you think one people or one book points to some great "cosmic answer" and divine intervention, a surprising thing happens if you study science. Other peoples were just as fascinating and supposedly "cosmically inspired."
Again, go to the library and read.
Oh Gene,
 Arguing with Conservative Christians over Creation vs. Evolution is like SEX with a Transsexual.... Ain't nothin' ever gonna come of it!
You know as well as I do, that without Myth, Christianity just isn't any FUN! We all know that the 7 day Biblical Creation Story was taken from a Babylonian creation Myth involving a 9 headed Dragon and 6 armed god!
We also all understand that Christmas was taken from the Winter Solstice!
But that's not the point! The point is:
There is a GOD Gene, and She's gonna have a word with you, one day, about how you've treated Her daughters! (don't feel lonely, She's gonna talk to me too!) (...of course, your conversation with Her will last much longer than mine)
Oh, Congrats on being named the "Shag-King"
Peace & Love
Jeffrey (Amoris Rhinoceros)
Teacher, Preacher, Theologian & Protagonist
Thursday, July 11, 2002 (SF Chronicle)
7 million-year-old skull startles anthropologists/It is by far the earliest human ancestor
David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor
 An international team of fossil hunters scouring the sands of a windswept Central African desert have unearthed the skull and jaw fragments of a creature that lived nearly 7 million years ago -- by far the earliest of all known human ancestors. Their spectacular find will force anthropologists to rethink their ideas of a mysterious period when our human forebears and the apes first evolved separately from a common ancestor and the first hominids began to walk upright.
"Unquestionably, this is one of the most important fossil discoveries of the last 100 years," said Harvard University anthropologist Daniel Lieberman. "It is the oldest skull by far of a human ancestor. This will have the scientific impact of a small nuclear bomb." The find also establishes for the first time that early hominid species thrived and evolved far outside the Rift Valley of East Africa and the caves of South Africa, which anthropologists have long believed were the only regions where the earliest humans evolved.
The team of 40 scientists, led by the French paleontologist Michel Brunet and Harvard University's David Pilbeam, has found a fossilized partial skull, two lower jawbones and three isolated teeth of what Brunet believes are the remains of five separate individuals of the same hominid species in the Sahel region's Djurab desert of northern Chad.
The group also unearthed more than 700 animal remains at the same site, including primitive elephants, crocodiles, giraffes, antelopes, boars and monkeys. The animal finds are significant, Brunet said, because they show how different the landscape was so many millions of years ago.
Today, the discovery site lies in a howling desert, swept by violent sandstorms and bordering what remains of a small, shallow lake. But many million years ago the area included an immense lake, with rich forests and open grasslands that supported a spectacular variety of mammals, amphibians, snakes and fish -- as well as the early pre-humans.
Brunet and his colleagues have named the new species Sahelanthropus tchadensis and nicknamed it Toumai, meaning "hope of life" in the local Goran language.
AN EARLIER, DISPUTED FIND
They date it at between 6 and 7 million years -- possibly a million years older than a disputed French find in Kenya two years ago that was dubbed Millenium Man and whose discoverers claim is close to 6 million years old, although other scientists maintain it is more recent.
Brunet and Pilbeam's fossil creature was only the size of a chimpanzee, but its long, flat face plus the shortness of its canine teeth and the thickness of the enamel on its molars clearly distinguish it from chimpanzees, Brunet said in a description prepared for reporters.
"These discoveries strongly shake our conceptions of the earliest steps in hominid history," he said.
Curiously, some parts of the fossil cranium and teeth closely resemble those of Ardipithecus ramidus, a 4.4 million-year-old hominid discovered in Ethiopia's Awash region by Tim D. White of UC Berkeley and his Ethiopian colleagues in 1995, Brunet said.
Other features resemble even those of the far younger "Lucy," the 3.4 million-year old Australopithecus afarensis fossil discovered in 1974 by Donald Johanson of the Institute of Human Origins at Arizona State University.
The formal report by Brunet and his team is being published today in the British journal Nature, along with a detailed description of the region's long- altered early geology and its diverse early animal life. White called Brunet's find "an important discovery for sure," and said in an interview Wednesday that the site, more than 1,500 miles west of his own working territory in Ethiopia, "is of tremendous importance and a paleontologist's dream."
CAUTIOUS SUPPORT
As to whether the fossil is truly that of an early human, White was more cautious than Brunet. "It's by no stretch of the imagination a chimpanzee," he said, "and it's certainly not even chimpanzee-like, but it's barely a hominid, so at this point I'd call it a dental hominid."
White's caution underscores the greatest mystery of all in the search for human origins -- the question of when it all began. For many decades, fossil hunters have been finding older and older remains of widely different early humanlike creatures, and the finds range in age over millions of years.
So the exact period when the very earliest humanlike creatures diverged from the apes may never be known, and scientist do not believe there can be any real "tree" of human evolution leading directly from a single first hominid at the bottom to our own species, Homo sapiens, at the very top. Many liken the process to a bush, with some branches extending and most dead-ending.
At his Institute for Human Origins, Johanson, Lucy's discoverer, noted that some scientists had estimated the great divergence of hominids from the apes occurred some 4 to 5 million years ago, while others argue it happened 5 to 8 million years ago.
"There's a lot more complexity in the story of early human evolution than we'd thought," Johanson said in an interview Wednesday, "and now it seems it may be 10 million years ago that the hominid line first walked upright."
Hailing the Brunet team's discovery as monumental, Johanson said it showed more clearly than ever that "the early hominids must have undergone very different evolutionary paths in very different parts of the African continent. " They must have evolved at varying rates and developed different features in response to the very different environments of Africa's many different regions, he said.
Click here to view a chart of the path of human evolution. It will open in another window.
|
