Gary73

Hey Max! Yes, after thinking about this and related subjects for nearly fifty years, I have come to a number of conclusions. One is that the Bible should not be taken literally from cover to cover. Therefore, I would like to understand the thinking of those who do, and, if possible, get a few of them to think beyond what they've been taught to believe. This story seemed like a good place to start, since it seems to be clear that it can't possibly be literally true. WRT your interpretation, yes, that's how most Christians and Jews see it. WRT the Nazis (it's an Internet discussion, so they had to be mentioned eventually, right?), as I understand it, they believed in God, (Gods?), but they interpreted things differently than most Christians do, and their interpretation allowed them to do things that most of us consider to be abominable. On the other hand, no one should ever forget that with their church's blessing, Christians have engaged in slavery, genocide, torture, kidnapping, murder, and so on throughout history. And once again, they believed that they were doing Right by God every bit as much as you and I believe that they were not. So how do we know what constitutes right action? That's a discussion for another thread. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Rstanley0312 - I didn't mean to imply that most Christians use a dartboard to choose which parts they take literally, just that they do make a choice. You seem to believe that your choices were made based on scholarly study; either yours or that of people you trust. You seem to believe that the issues are so clear that you didn't even really make a choice; that it's as plain as 1 + 1 = 2*. That's fine, but the fact remains that there are Christians around the world who disagree with your conclusions, including some who sincerely believe that the entire Bible (KJV, usually) should be taken literally, and they believe in their interpretation every bit as much as you do. Again, those are the people I'd like to hear from. BTW, I think that I do get what you're saying: that anyone who disagrees with you is insane or an idiot, maybe both. (Your words, not mine!) * Again getting off topic, but mathematicians don't find 1 + 1 = 2 to be all that obvious. It apparently takes 150 pages of proofs to define the number 1, then another 100 to define arithmatic. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Quade - Not to get too far off topic, but I had a friend years ago who honestly believed that the State of Georgia sends gravel trucks out to drop rocks onto the road so they'd be kicked up and break headlights so that the State could collect sales tax on the replacements. He also believed that Rock music was a communist plot to destroy the minds of our young people. Guess how many guns that guy owned! "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Rstanley0312 - Like most Christians, you seem to want to choose which portions of the Bible to take literally and which ones to interpret in other ways. That's fine with me, especially since you basically seem to be agreeing with me that the Tower of Babel story can't be literally true. My original question was addressed to the hard-core Fundamentalists (Would "Literalists" be a better term?) who really do believe that every passage in the Bible must be taken as literally true. We haven't heard from any of them yet. Any takers? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

RonD1120 - So God wants us to ignore our ability to understand the Universe and spend all our time praising him? That's pretty depressing for both sides of the relationship. Kind of like an Instructor keeping a student on static line forever, no matter how well he does, just so the instructor can get paid to jump. Sorry, I can't buy that one. Any God who loves us would want us to reach our full potential, just like a skydiving Instructor, a parent, or even a pet owner. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Where does it say anything about it being a waste? "...and now nothing will be restrained from them..." makes it pretty clear that He believed that they'd make it. The King James Version was written by the leading Biblical scholars of the time, based on their translations of Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. documents. But if you have an original Greek source, that would be interesting to see. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

That doesn't make any sense. 11:6 states clearly that God thought the tower was doable. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Specifically those who believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, true in every detail. How do you explain the story of the tower of Babel from Genesis? 11:3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime (tar) had they for mortar. 11:4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 11:5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. 11:6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. In other words, this passage states that God himself believed that it was possible for people to build a tower high enough to allow them to physically enter heaven, which would therefore have to be a physical place in the sky, and no more than about 500 feet up, since that's about the highest that it's possible to build a tower using bricks and tar. We now know beyond any possible doubt that if Heaven exists at all, it most definitely is not a physical place that's 500 feet above the ground. Any God worthy of the name would also know this, of course, but Bronze Age peasants wouldn't have, so it seems pretty clear that this story was invented by peasants, not related by any type of God. And if there's even a single story in the Bible that's not the literal word of God, then the entire document is open to question, right? So my question to Fundamentalists is: How do you explain all of this? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

If you're serious, Atlanta would be the obvious choice. More local population, more local skydivers, more travellers through the area, better access to the busiest airport in the world, better weather, and so on. We've been hearing rumors about tunnel projects here for years, but no one's ever broken ground yet. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

It's fine for different Instructors to have different teaching styles, but we should all be teaching the same material, at least at a particular dropzone. Unfortunately, not all DZOs, S&TAs, and Chief Instructors are willing to do the hard parts of their jobs, including this one. Just another example of the lack of professionalism which is one of the things that keeps skydiving a fringe sport. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Definitely take it to your rigger. If the stain is on the reserve portion of the container, have your rigger open it up to make sure the soda (or whatever) didn't soak in and form a sticky mass inside the reserve canopy fabric. Heard of that happening a few years ago. Found on scheduled repack; probably would have been a fatality otherwise. If it's not near the reserve then it'll probably just take a little soaking and light scrubbing to fix it up. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Try this: 1. Hang the canopy up on a canopy rack by the tail, spread full width. high enough to get the nose just off the ground. 2. From the bottom side of the canopy, grasp a few cells at a time by the nose and lift them high enough to let the sand fall out of the airlock sections. Shake the canopy a little. 3. Ease the nose down and let the sand fall to the nose. 4. From the top side, grasp the nose from underneath and turn it inside out to dump the sand. Repeat 2 - 4 until the sand is all out. Good luck! "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

It's definitely possible to induce line twists, even on a properly loaded student canopy. USPA recently clarified the meaning of the A-License requirement to make a sharp turn followed "immediately" by a sharp turn in the other direction. What they want is for you to turn, ease up, let the canopy go straight, then turn the other way. The idea is to learn your canopy's limits, but to do so gradually. Start with gentle turns, then slowly make them more aggressive. When you get to the point where the canopy starts to act funny, remember where that point is and don't exceed it. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

You could have stopped at Cheesy Bake! Sign me up! (It's before 5 PM on Saturday, isn't it? ) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

I doubt there's a system of any kind that a skydiver couldn't foul up. Heard a good line today: "We could give you guys bowling balls and you'd either break 'em or get 'em pregnant!". So yes, what you're talking about may be possible, but mis-routed chest straps are pretty low on the list of fatality causes (only two in the last decade, I believe), so the effort would probably be better spent in other areas. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

B-12s and even quick-ejector snaps used to be fairly common on chest and leg straps, but fell out of favor between ten and twenty years ago. One reason is that the newer buckles are lighter, but the main reason seemed to be the fear that the snaps could come open accidentally even when correctly fastened. No system is perfect, but standard buckles are easy to route correctly, easy to check, and very reliable. Having said that, I have B-12s on both my rigs' leg straps, just because they make it so easy to put the rig on. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

From the "Qualifications" section of the job listing: You may be exposed to ... and high pressured gases with explosive potential Is that the military description of fart gas? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Oops! I meant Cutaway, of course, not Breakaway. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Good plan! "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Definitely! No wonder it was such a pain! As for Wings containers in general, all I know is that I have a lot more trouble with them than with Vector, Javelin, or Dolphin. Maybe special, undocumented techniques are needed, but if so, then isn't that a design flaw in itself? Seems to me that a well-designed container is one that any rigger can easily pack the day he gets his temporary license. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Yes, there were crazies back then, even more than now, but they weren't the norm. Most skydivers then, as now, were regular folks who wanted a little more excitement in their lives. If most jumpers had been like those in Gypsy Moths, the sport would never have survived the sixties. Now on the technical side, yeah, it was definitely well done for the time, so kudos to the camera jumpers and all. I just hate the overall premise, that we're all suicidal lunatics. It's like the Apocalypse Now premise that there was something so evil about the U.S. involvement in Vietnam that every American who went there came back insane or dead. One of these days I'd like to see a movie that portrays skydiving fairly. I had hoped that Breakaway would do that; after all it was written and directed by a skydiver, but no: just more Hollywood crap. It's a hell of a thing when the most accurate media portrayal of skydiving comes from a Weather Channel segment on how the weather affects certain sports! "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Another one of those movies that set skydiving back ten years, at least WRT the public's perception of us. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Good point! Tandem is the only training method in which the Instructor is totally responsible for the student's safety. As for getting the Coach rating, if you completed the course, that means you have the pink card with the Course Director's signature, so that should be good for a year. If it's longer than that or you don't have and can't get the CD's signature, it may be a problem. Either way, I'd recommend that you contact Jim Crouch ( safety@uspa.org ). He's the one who'll have the final word, so you might as well go to the source, eh? BTW: never talk to your uncle again! "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan

Sunrise doesn't have a size chart on their Web site, but they do list a stock W8 for sale and claim that it fits a 150 main and 143 reserve. Better check with them to be sure, though. Keep in mind that they have a habit of claiming that their reserve containers will hold bigger canopies than can actually comfortably fit. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan