idrankwhat

You could have stopped there. Sorry, couldn't resist. I'm weak.

For what it's worth, I scored an HC5 from them a couple of months back for $250. The cables were missing but that was it. A trip to monoprice.com fixed that (except for the "half moon" cable. Got that from suntekstore.com in Hong Kong for $1). I also picked up an extra Sony NPFH70 battery with camcorder case for $40 from 2ndturn. No complaints on either purchase.

Just a few comments to add briefly. First of all, not really trying to shoot the messenger but the American Enterprise Institute is a PNAC retirement community, but I read the article anyway. Now, think about the leadership that the the Democrats and Obama just replaced. It was an Imperial, hardline, 51% "mandate" that was thrust down the country's throat. That extra 1% seemed to give them the right to completely ignore the other 49%, and they did, and quite arrogantly and abusively I might add. That is one of the reasons that they lost in 2006 and 2008. The call for "stewardship" fair play and balance is a bit hard to swallow when, after the last 8 years of hardline "with us or against us" hardball, what the Republican's deserve is Hillary as President with complete supreme and opaque executive powers. Thankfully, that's not what we're getting, but the Republicans peed in that bed, made it, and they deserve at least one night in it. I see it as quite the opposite. Obama has gone to great lengths to include the Republican party, in his cabinet and in the negotiations to date. He's offered the Republicans olive branches in the form of additional tax cuts as well as striking things from the stimulus bill that raised a big stink, like the sodding of the Mall. Something which actually would stimulate the local economy and provide us with something tangible for our dollars. He's made compromises yet all but three of the Republicans seem to think that HE needs to roll over. They're still in "with us or against us" mode. His "I won" comment was a reminder that America made the decision to get off the obviously errant path of the last administration. The weatherization thing makes sense, but Stewart slammed it as being boring. It's hard to get used to a leader who makes logical but uninflamatory statements, especially when you haven't needed writers for a comedy news show in nearly a decade. You only had to repeat the news to get a laugh. A final vote in July on a stimulus package is not a good idea when your economy sucks...... a year ago. He's trying to pin this attitude solely on the Democrats? After the last 8 years that's so disingenuous that it's not even funny. Alright, I've got to get the kids to bed. I wasn't meaning to be as negative as I have been but I'll just finish with this. The Republicans should be damn happy that they aren't dealing with a photo negative version of who they were over the last decade and a half.

That's really cute. {I hope so too, but it's certainly not even close right now} Yea, that's true. I was just positing theory. I suppose a better way to put it would be "hanging out in Speaker's Corner and complaining about emotional posts is like going to Bonfire and bitching about boobs!

This is what Speaker's Corner is all about. Of course there are going to be flashes of extreme emotion. But the art of the dialog is in the ability to temper those emotions and foster the exchange of ideas, not simply to vent extreme emotion.

Fire? Flight? Wireless internet? There were points in human development when each of these would have been perceived as miraculous. How feeble minded will our generation be perceived as in 100 or 1000 years? The nature of a creator may not be "provable" with the knowledge we've acquired at this point. But we're also not at the apex of human development (boy, is THAT an understatement). Who knows, maybe understanding "God" IS the apex of human development. I think that science could be the path to that apex. I think some in the religious community wish to use faith as a short cut. Perhaps a few have been changed, if only by a small margin. Many, probably not. But regardless of the outcome of the debate (so far) the act of debating has merit. It may be only one tiny step towards understanding through the exploration and exchange of ideas. But think of where we'd be if we abandoned these exercises.

Visual aids attached. The HC5 is a bit bigger than the HC 28-62 or PC models. I believe that the CX models are smaller. I like the side mount flash idea. I'd rather have the flash on the side than a camera. As a final plug, I'm quite happy with the helmet. And by the time I'm ready to step up to a fully loaded FTP, the cameras should be small enough that the Mantle is overkill, I hope. Cheers.

Which HC series camera? I've got an HC5 and an xti and there's no room left between the cameras. It might be possible to shift the mounts forward so that more of the camera bodies are extending over the front of the mounting area. That might give you enough room to mount the flash in the back. I was thinking about that possibility for the distant (experience wise) future. I've got mixed thoughts on the FTP. I think that it's a better helmet to mount all of your goodies and it has the bonus of giving you a better "pyramid" shape with regard to deflecting away from snag points. But I have to mention that the weight difference between the FTP and the Mantle is significant. The Mantle is much lighter. If I can find another camera I'll post my set up. But as far as my advice, take my jump numbers into consideration. I've got a lot more theoretical than practical experience to share. I only post because I don't know that there are many people flying a Mantle just yet.

and the liberals will like Uranus (don't tell me you didn't set that up on purpose) The conservatives will actually like Uranus (tap tap), but they won't admit it. The liberals will just say that there's not anything wrong with that and have a parade. (don't tell me you didn't set that up on purpose)

Thanks for asking that one. I was just about to.

By the way, this was a very interesting program addressing the Science/ID debate. Good stuff. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

The physics, chemistry, and engineering behind the technology is not what failed. The failures you mention can be explained scientifically, which more often than not, will end up pointing the error at the human component of the equation. Of course then you can pursue the answer further if you examine the biochemical aspects of the decision making process of the human. Isn't science fun?!?!!?!

Because Science is a process which uses observation and experimentation aimed at arriving at the best answer to the question at hand. "Science" cannot be "wrong". As a result of experimentation a hypothesis may need to be revised in order to address inconsistencies. But then it is, the experiment is re-run and if it supports the hypothesis then it is re-run again. That's the beauty of science. It has to be reproducible. Reproduce it often enough and you are well on your way to establishing a theory. Gravity is a great example. But science and belief in God are not necessarily mutually exclusive. You could easily argue that Science is a way of observing and explaining "God's creation" and serve both paradigms. However if rote belief in a narrowly defined diety as manifested by a the culling of a few historical human writings, supported by imagery created through classical paintings by Roman honkies, for Roman honkies, then IMO, you're not using your God given gray matter to it's potential. But that's simply my opinion, and a run-on sentence.

Read my earlier response. I think it could have great benefit. However I don't trust that the information won't be abused by third parties such as insurers. "Smarter"? Not the term I'd choose. I tune in to the Extremely Ignorant Broadcasting network on occasion, just to see what the talking point flavor of the day is. Then I either tune out at the commercials (which isn't usually too long) or when I can start tasting the bile. Whichever comes first

If I disappoint, I apologize however I do have one question. Here in Virginia, nearly all of the Chinese restaurants (at least the US version of Chinese food) seem to be located in close proximity to a pet store. Does this seem to be the case elsewhere? If so, then that might explain the running jokes. Some folks here at work refer to the local Chinese restaurant as "puppy hut". Of course that's not appropriate. Now if it were a Korean restaurant that might be a different story. I hear gaegogi burgers are quite tasty. Nevertheless, I'll stick with the bulgogi.

what? are you against keeping the children from starving? why do you hate children? why do you hate keeping the pet population under control. Both are admirable policies We're in complete agreement But why cats? I've got a friend with a bunch of llamas. In this economy they're eating better than he is now. That's why I proposed "llamasagna" as the most logical solution

Feb 9, 2009 LIMBAUGH: Betsy McCaughey has written a column at Bloomberg detailing some of the most onerous provisions in this stimulus bill on health care. And there's a new bureaucracy created, the national coordinator of health information technology. Now, listen to this. The national coordinator of health information technology will monitor treatments that your doctor gives you to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost-effective. You and he seem to share two inexplicably similar parallel thought processes. It's nice of you two to finally get outraged at Obama about this five year old Bush baby

Put it in the "another misinformation campaign by Limbaugh and FOX" column. Why you keep trusting that "entertainer", I'll never know If you want to actually read the bill instead of the opinion piece that waded up the panties of the dittoheads, it's here If you want to know more about this "new bureaucracy" (or when it was created) that she refers to, go here. I haven't read all of H.R.1 but I don't see this as being the demon that McCaughey is making it out to be. It sounds like she read a lot in between the lines she referenced. I personally see the benefit of having medical information easily available however, I don't like the idea that your information will likely be misused by some parties, such as certain members of the "donor class". That makes me reluctant to having that information in a national database at this point. That said, I take issue with McCaughey's closing argument that we should treat the medical industry as a "growth industry" for it's GDP value and not treat it as a "cost problem". We spend more and get less than any other people on the planet with regard to our health care dollar. The priority in medicine is (shocked) medical care, not the Executive, administrative and shareholder bank accounts. If we keep looking the bottom line as the metric for success then our health care system will as much of a parasite on our society as the banking industry is. $0.03

I'm reluctant to post anything given my experience, usually content to stalk this forum WRT safety issues. However after following the above link, then diverting to the accident reports I found this one. No RSL, no AAD. Either one would have likely changed the outcome. I'll check Parachutist when I get home to read the report that you're referring to. P.S. Anyone know how to narrow the text on this thread? I've got a 22" widescreen and I still can't read without scrolling back and forth. P.P.S Ok, what's the deal with the font now?

I concur. I think we can all make fun of Blogojevich without feeling like we have to misspell his name.

This is a surprise, why? It's not surprising at all given the global nature of the economy these days. I don't think it's a "left/right" issue. I'm no economist but my understanding is that 70% of our economy is based on consumption. We'd have to completely re-tool our economy and society in order to go from a consumption basis to a production basis.

You mean the same McCain that's currently trying to remove a "Buy American" clause from the bill? What kinda commie is he?! Blues, Dave i could be wrong, but the guy that said we needed to remove the buy american clause from the bill was tall, skinny and black. Mccain is short hunched over and white. FYI, hunched over white guy agrees with tall skinny black guy. "Mr. President, this bill also contains protectionist “Buy America” provisions that will prove harmful to both the American worker and the world economy. The Senate version of the stimulus bill goes beyond the stark protectionism of its House counterpart in a way that risks serious damage to our economy. The Senate bill requires that major projects funded in the bill favor American-made steel, iron, and manufacturing over goods produced abroad. These anti-trade measures may sound welcome to Americans who are hurting in this economy and faced with the specter of layoffs. The United States, after all, produces the world's finest products. Yet short-sighted protectionist measures risk greatly exacerbating our current economic woes. Already, one economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics has calculated that the "Buy American" provisions in this bill will cost more jobs than it will generate. Some of our largest trading partners, including Canada and the European Union, have warned that such a move could invite protectionist retaliation, further harming our ability to generate jobs and economic growth.

The Daschle revolving door scrutiny is a good start. Now, how about the other 535, not counting the "retired" representatives?

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and the band of libs that vote with them. They forced banks - via legislation and strong arming by their buddies at ACORN (which is supposed to be a get out the vote organization) - to make loans that people were not qualified for and wree destined to fail. The reason? Social justice, in their minds. Idiots. This is the second time that you've completely ignored Marg's post. The information is there if you're interested in broadening your perspective. If you wish to keep it narrow in order to isolate responsibility to your demon du jour (while ignoring the majority of the scope of the issue) then that's your decision. However I'm pretty sure that this approach is why history seems to repeat itself.

No, it's not. "...you can't profit from a bailout." is a misinterpretation/spin of what he said, but it's not what he said. I gave you the quote of what he said! "...at a time when most of these institutions were teetering on collapse and they are asking for taxpayers to help sustain them, and when taxpayers find themselves in the difficult position that, if they don't provide help, that the entire system could come down on top of our heads," the president said, "that is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful." "There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses. Now is not that time. That's what he said. I may have paraphrased but I'm not reading anything between the lines. If you want to criticize the bailout or the idea of government having such an influence on private, or pseudo-private industry that's fine. There's plenty to argue about without making stuff up.