mr2mk1g

Since this thread appears to have degenerated into a pissing contest between children about who's better EU or US (although I'm not at all sure about the point in that)... how would the fact that Europe gives out around $25 billion in aid by comparison to the $6.9 billion provided by the US factor into your "most generous" nation comment?

Sorry - gotta call you on that. Sure, the japs alone beat you on a pure $ ammount (making the US 2nd)... but when seen on a per capita basis or on a $/GDP basis the US is waaaaay down the list.

Assuming that your post is a parody of my comment - I had intended that to be directed towards both sides of the argument (if not actually at all posters). There have been incredible slips from reality made by a lot of people in this thread; on both sides. I didn't intend to single out either side nor anyone in particular as the subject of my observation.

hon, you've never needed an excuse to touch my booty

Thankyou, Sangiro, the Greenies and Dropzone.com in general. I like the place; I think it’s justly run, the rules are well written and well applied and it is a great source of information and entertainment... even if that entertainment is sometimes merely the argument itself. If any arse kissing is needed it ought to be done by the patrons who come here for free. The few individuals here who do their damndest to destroy this place and what it can offer can kiss MY arse.

The problem was across the road from a middle school. Moving it has to be a good thing... even if the problem simply manifests itself elswhere there's a good likelyhood (or at least a hope) that there won't be so many kids caught in the crossfire next time.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1388625#1388625 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1378469#1378469

This thread is a testament to a startling amount of ignorance and stupidity.

I have the observer. It's a bit of a pain to say the least to read it in freefall – if that’s your primary concern then go for one of the other models. I simply went for the observer as it’s (IMO) the nicest looking and I was simply after something that I could wear in place of my Omega, which I felt guilty about knocking around. As for their use at all, they do work and I can see it if I focus on it… that's if I haven’t knocked a button and put it into barometer or compass setting half way down of course. My main worry is that I can produce several thousand ft. changes in altitude by simply blowing into the sensor. Putting my mouth over the side of the watch and sucking gently makes me jump 8000ft! If I can do that with my mouth God knows what 120mph wind will do to the altitude it reads. All I have to do is turn my wrist and the sensor faces downwards... suddenly I'm low... or am I? I've also not done a jump yet where the watch read the same on the ground both before and after going up... although this difference is never more than a few dozen ft. so I guess no less of a change than any other alti. To be blunt, I don't think any of these models are sufficiently reliable to be used as a primary altitude device (well... secondary to your eyes at least). That said they are cool toys that can produce interesting info on climb rate and will log certain info about the number of ascents you make. If you're in the market for a watch and you happen to be a skydiver I would certainly recommend them... they are very nice watches afterall. But as an alti? Well, I'll leave that recommendation to those with more exp than me; personally I'll be sticking to my good old analogue one.

dude... like... you should talk to someone....

The way he tells it the closest scenario I can come up with is this: He's exits the plane alone and has a mall on his main. He's unable to fix the problem despite his intimate knowledge of parachuting equipment and impromptude attempts at major rigging work in freefall. An instructor swoops over and is also unable to make it work (unsurprising given the heroic DiCaprio has already filed) so he phisically cuts the cords which are retaining the old parachute. Presumably DiCaprio's reserve also fails as the instructor then hooks up to him and they both use the instructors main. Odd really because all I thought happened was he did a tandem where the main had a mal and they landed the reserve without further event. He'd probably have done well to realise what happened at all without being told about it.

just curious... would simply changing the adress of the file not kill the link and mirrors they'd posted?

hehehehe, I sent this to a friend I work with together with a link to the attachment for the punchline. He liked it so much he decided to send it to his friends... only this time he didn't send the link; he copied the picture and sent it as an attachment. Next thing he knows is he gets this e-mail (edited by me to remove names etc) heheheheh Oops. Guess no one knows about me as I sent a link... whatever software they're using however caught the attachment. Knowing the partners though, no one's in any trouble - they're known for sending worse themselves. Hell for the office secret santa there's a prize for the most disgustingly rude and offensive gift. To be honest I'm surprised they're even monitoring the stuff. I guess Big Brother's watching afterall.

So are you taking offers now or what?

There's a lot of argument about going to war when not ready... I still can't get past the idea that they were pretty ready (as well as you can be) but that the commanders on the ground are employing these vehicles in entirely the wrong way. Humvees are being put into combat situations where army doctrine would suggest the use of an armoured vehicle. Even when up armoured these trucks are not designed to be used as armoured vehicles. If the commanders want armoured vehicles there are hundreds of them in the army... why on earth use a humvee, (even an up-armoured humvee) instead? Forget all the rear echelon stuff and how there are no front lines; I'm talking about combat troops going into battle in a vehicle not designed for the task in which it is being employed. Someone has got it into their head that a humvee is an armoured vehicle. It is not. There are hundreds, if not thousands of APC's and IFV's in service in the US army, those are the vehicles that should be used in such instances. Looking at the cost of up-armouring these vehicles it can't be that much more expensive to ship more of the existing APC stock out to the gulf. Humvees are a great tool and have a very broad place in the modern army. But they were never designed to be used in the way in which they now find themselves deployed.

You're right in that its one of the areas where the lest benefits would be seen. I don't dispute the idea that fewer guns would mean fewer accidental deaths - I'd be stupid not to... but I don't think that the reduction in deaths would be that statistically significant by comparison to the reduction in ownership you would need to achieve it. In essence, whilst technically correct, I would suggest there are far more compelling arguments to run. I'm not a fan of the argue-everything-possible strategy, you simply end up looking like an idiot. Overall it's far better to pick and chose your arguments and only really press it home when you have a compelling point to make. Sadly there are a lot of people out there who want to argue every single point of every single argument. It just makes people look silly IMO.

I don't know... more to the point I don't really care. I feel far more at risk from cars than guns. Hell, I feel more at risk from falling down the stairs than I do of guns... but then I don't live in the same country as you. Thus my perceptions of the risks aren't at all useful to this discussion.

It is a silly comparison to draw... but were someone to do it they certainly wouldn't be using 24x7 as a gun owners "exposure time"... because... drum roll... gun ownership is not of its self dangerous. You are not "exposed" to a gun merely because it exists... similarly you are not exposed to a car merely because it exists. You have to drive the car, walk by the car or pick up the gun, have someone else pick up the gun. Thus Kallend's statement agreeing with the earlier rebuttal of such a comparison is correct.

hey, I'm not looking for such a comparison. I just found your change of heart in the space of two posts amusing.

You just shot down your argument from the previous post. Does owning a gun put you at increased risk ? NO. Therefore comparing car stats of time spent in + around vehicles with 24x7 gun ownership stats are ridiculous. You have to compare exposure time... as guns are not dangerous sat in a draw that does not count towards exposure time.

hehe, I damn near got suspended for something very similar to that while I was at school. Damn idiot friends selling stuff on... they were only supposed to take it home with them! People were a lot less sensative to this sort of thing back then though... and hell, that's not even that long ago. Wonder if "pipe bomb" might actually mean "fire cracker" too.

I wonder how a pic from 5 years ago gets to be one of the pictures of the year? http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/041206/ids_photos_sp/r2468109252.jpg

If you don't like the system, thumb your nose at it by from now on referring to yourself as a Jedi - I'm serious. I can't think of a better way of letting "the man" know that you think the PC classification system is a crap idea. 390,000 of us did it over here and it worked wonders to bring them down a peg or two. From now on, you shall all be Jedi-Americans and shall henceforth be allowed to make "bbrrrrthew... bbbbbreeetheww" sounds as you waft an imaginary light sabre in the faces of the authorities.

Like I said earlier in the thread... no matter what you believe, you're always in a minority. Take that on board and accept all the other minorities out there. (edited to add that the comment is not directed at anyone at all)

But the point you're missing is that Atheism is not having no belief in God but activly not believing in God (if that distinction even makes sense). One is a passive act, the other is active. You can't activly do something in relation to something unless you are conceptually aware of it in the first place.