wartload

You probably have a good idea what sort of riding you plan to do already. If so, and unless someone's gonna give you a "learner" bike nearly for free, get the bike that you will eventually end up wanting. Lots of people have wasted many $$ getting something too small/big/slow/heavy/ ... whatever ... to begin with, then having to trade it out later. The only argument for a "learner" bike is that you'll probably "drop" your first bike, or part it so that it falls over (beware of asphalt in the hot sun), during the first 6 months that you start to ride.

Not really ... here's the formula: Wife with job = ability to get a Sears credit card Sears credit card = ability to get a big, red, box full of tools Big, red, box full of tools = you're a mechanic You're a mechanic = you can get a job at most dealerships Job at a dealership = making enough income to get your own credit Getting your own credit = buying motorcycle, jet ski, boat, sports car, etc. Buying motorcycle, jet ski, boat, sports car, etc. = going so deeply into debt that your wife leaves you, you lose your job, you start hitting the bars ... looking for a new wife ... with a job! Ain't the 'Merican dream great?

Why be pissed? If it weren't for people with problems, even if they are PEBCAC, you wouldn't have a job. You need to get another line of work, Wingy. Have you ever thought of going into aviation journalism? Then people who get twisted knickers over punctuation and spelling would feel the same way about how you do things. I'm not trying to slam you, Bud ... just giving you a reality check.

Charcoal, hickory, oak (only for pig), or mesquite (easy to overdo!). Propane? Only for Hank Hill ... and that's what turned his kid gay.

Very well put, NickD! I think the free fly folks may, in a way, be going "back to the future". In the days during the transition between style & accuracy jumps vs. RW, I can remember often wanting to, and occasionally doing, a solo freefall. There was something extremely relaxing about exiting high, going into the best delta that I could, and actually feeling the buffet of my body moving through an unstable air mass...then slowing it down enough that the PC wouldn't smack me too hard when it opened. I'm not really so sure that I understand making a practice out of intentional downwind landings (look very cool, but cool doesn't seem to be a good reason for hurting/killing so many people).

Was that named after the Tuskegee Airmen?

A friend of mine and I tried. Ours tasted like crap. I've had ample opportunity (in past years) to taste a variety of home-made (Southern) types of booze. Some of if was pretty good, and some of it was simply very potent ... but all tasted better than our own potato juice. (It did produce a lovely blue flame when ignited, though!)

I see that the town's name is "Espertantina". Isn't that Portugese for "a little wish", or, "a little hope"? If so, does that tell us something more?

Ok ... here's what this was all about. I've been reading a book called, "The Borderlands of Science", by Michael Shermer. I'm exceptionally impressed with the way that he presents a framework for analytical thinking--the first parts of the book may be the best of all. One of the later parts of the book, which discusses (among other things) how scientific paradigm shifts take place, uses the work of Frank Sulloway to explain how birth order may influence one's ability to accept/embrace new ideas. In short, the first born child in a family (due to the amount of time parents spend with them, having the responsibility of younger siblings, etc.) tends to buy into the existing framework of established laws. Later-born kids are more likely to be open to new ideas. Later-born kids are also more likely to engage in high-risk activities, too, and that was why I set up the survey. At this writing, here are the survey numbers. Short version: First-born 46% Later-born 54% Sample - 266 The full breakdown is: First-born child in my family 122 / 46% Second-born child in my family 89 / 33% Third-born child in my family 32 / 12% Fourth-born child in my family 15 / 6% Later than fourth-born child (poor Mom!) 8 / 3% As was noted, we have to allow for there (possibly) being more later-born kids, on average, than first-borns. I don't really have any way to do that, because there are other factors that we'd have to look at, including average fertility rate (AFR) by geographic location, AFR by income level (assuming that perhaps not many skydivers come from very low income families), etc. Shermer seemed to be saying that research indicates that just dividing people into first-born and later-born can produce results (identifiable traits) that are sufficiently statistically significant to clearly not be happening by chance. I hope that you read this just before bedtime!

File this in the "free and unwanted advice" department ... DON'T get married. But also DON'T have kids until/unless you find someone to whom you really DO want to get married and who really want's to get married to you. I don't see anything wrong with living with someone as long as you want. I don't see all that much long with a totally committed couple having kids, married or not. However ... It may someday be a source of embarassment and insecurity for the kids, and it's almost certainly a hell of a road for the woman to travel when "baby daddy" walks out because he decides that he wasn't really all that committed.

That would count as first. :)

Absolutely! (Good catch, by the way.) If there's only one kid in your family, there's a 100% chance that it will be you. Two kids makes it 50%, three makes it 33.33(333...)%, etc. I'm going to use the results of the author's research, though, and just compare this very UNscientific poll to his "statistically significant" results. The point isn't to come up with new research data, but only to see how well this group fits the research already done.

Typical ... once she found her freedom, that was the end of the head.

I've been reading a book that covers theories about the causes of paradigm shifts. The author makes some statements about birth order, and I wanted to see how this group would fit one of his claims. Please take the poll by indicating where you were in the birth order of kids in your family -- even if you don't care to make comments. I'll mention the book, and tell what the author's premise is (and how it relates to this forum) after there have been enough responses to make it fun. Thanks!

A guy that I knows eats sandwiches made of peanut butter and liverwurst (braunschweiger). He swears that they are great. I'll probably never find out.

Yep ... God bless Lewis Grizzard for that bit of insight!

I don't care much, at this point. I just wanted that old lady outta there ... and her husband put up for sainthood!

Yeah, but MOST fellow flyers don't poop on your front door step. Are you suggesting that I should stop?

I love that story! One of my profs shared almost the exact same letter with a class that I was in about 1966. It was supposedly written to a radio station who'd given it to the lady as a contest prize, and what she told her roomate was a little more earthy ... but same story. (The good stuff holds up over time!)

No ... that's a "crock" ... not a "croc".

Nor should Sheryl Crow!

"Men are assholes and women are sluts" What's the down side to this?

The Borderlands of Science - Michael Shermer Even before you get into Shermer's examples, the groundwork that he sets for rational thinking is brilliant.

Sorta/kinda related site

Nope ... but it's interesting that I've heard this story called an "urban legend" and a myth, when it really is a fact. I know Chuck well.