davjohns

I thought walking THROUGH the fire was a cleansing ritual. What's this walking BETWEEN nonsense? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Dave's point has no merit whatsoever. He criticized the statistics of a survey. No paradigm shift in statistical sampling or analysis has occurred. None. Nada. Zilch. No. Dave criticized the potential for bias in the underlying selection and characterization. It's like a statistic that shows that "98 percent of the highest ranking and most experienced bureaucrats in federal government believe that government is not too intrusive." Or "98 percent of the most experienced and successful plaintiffs' lawyers think that tort reform is bad policy." The statistical methods used may be flawless. But right away something smells fishy. This is why I don't respond to Kallend's taunts, insults, and emotional snipes. There is an obvious red flag in the sample group. Had he said, 'that's the best we have' or something of the sort, I would have respected him more. As it is, he claims anything published by this group is beyond reproach (that alone raises my eyebrow) and insults anyone that recognizes there is a problem. It's kind of a case of 'methinks he doth protest too much'. It just makes it hard to take his evidence at face value when is so argumentative and insulting. The sample group is 'those most published'. The conclusion is that the sample group represents the larger group. That is inductive reasoning. It isn't to be thrown out entirely. But it begs the question whether there is a better way to sample. What publications were included in the sample group here? That, alone, could greatly influence the outcome of the research. Are there generally recognized professional organizations for climate professionals that could be surveyed? That would seem to be a much better way to get at the group we are trying to evaluate. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

You're a good man. Personally, I would never have thought to contact you if something went wrong with the car. You had your money. I had my car...with all faults. We're done. However, you have to wake up with yourself. You did what you needed to do for yourself. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Interesting. I've often wondered about the people who post hereon. Are they as arrogant, abusive, and offensive in real life? I hope not. In real life, I would be sorely tempted to punch them in the nose. We tend to do that kind of thing where I'm from. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I don't have a problem with communism as a form of government. It has pros and cons like any other form. The problem is that it does not contend with human nature once you leave he extreme local level. There are communes in Israel that work very well. But everyone knows everyone and can exert peer pressure to keep people from being useless. And they know who genuinely needs help and who is a slug. Once you lose the ability to know everyone's situation, communism starts having problems. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Huh...? lol...the whole 'revolution' thing? They knew the depths government could sink to. So again... Huh...? Sorry. I didn't realize I wasn't clear. When I wrote, "I think the men who wrote the US Constitution were optimistic of a great new nation, but they were faced with the realities of the past.", I mean that they had just fought an eight year war with an oppressive government. They had (most of them) studied governments of the past to see that any form of government can become oppressive. They created the constitution to limit the power of the federal government, keep power closer to the governed, and ultimately in the hands of the people. The realities of their past were that government that was not tightly constrained had to be overthrown with blood and violence. They were optimistic for the future of our country and its government, but they also had the realities of the past to contend with. Better? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Favorite bit: Bond flips the cover off a red button on the gear shift and says: Bond: Are you gonna complain the whole way? M: Oh, go on then. Eject me. See if I care. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The files are the pics from ebay, where I bought her. I didn't change the names. Feel better? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Huh...? lol...the whole 'revolution' thing? They knew the depths government could sink to. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

She's going to be my project bike. Got some carbon fiber mods in mind. The newer lines are sexier. VFR800 attached for comparison. But the 1100 is bulletproof as a powerplant. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

My VFR800 is nice, but doesn't have the torque my CBR1100XX had. So, I had to get another Blackbird. Luckily, they are plentiful in England. Have to go through London next weekend to get her. I plan to take the trains there Thursday evening and ride her back Friday through Sunday with stops along the way. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The article says it was just a temporary thing. Hard to believe people knew who he was, saw his face on a bottle of liquor in the liquor store, and were so offended they reported it for action. Really? Reminds me of the preacher who was going to preach on the ten commandments and emphasize the part about stealing so the person who stole his watch would return it. When he got to the part about adultery, he remembered where he left his watch and left out the emphasis. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Don't get me started, Jerry. The IRS has a forced entry capability. Extreme and a waste of money in my eyes. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Ummm....ok. I wasn't there. So, I hate to be too judgmental. But.... It 'blew open'? It opened 1.5 inches or 3.8cm. I would describe that as came open or cracked open. Disconcerting, to be sure. But 'blew open'? And the stewardess had the presence of mind to work the intercom, but was hysterical enough to scream in terror and hide under a seat? I know it has to be unnerving to have your plane do something it shouldn't at 27,000ft, but to describe it in such terms later? OK.... I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So, he's really always been an optimist crying "cant' we all just get along"? Hey, I'm a bit of an optimist myself, but that's a little too far for me. I think the men who wrote the US Constitution were optimistic of a great new nation, but they were faced with the realities of the past. Thanks for the background, Andy. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Maybe I misunderstand what you are describing. The only psych hold I am familiar with is when they lock you up for 72hrs to make sure you aren't suicidal. If that's what you are describing, nobody in there has guns, so I don't understand your point. Should we remove firearms from anyone who has been on a psych hold? I hope you know that all it takes to lock someone up is another someone claiming the person is suicidal. I've been involved in one. There is no real due process. It's a bit scary. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The interesting thing is that the Constitution is not meant just to keep ME from infringing on YOUR rights. The Bill of Rights is meant to restrain the government. In that case, legality is all you have. Respect? Give me a break. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I looked it up. Initial games were only a stadium long race. Then a race with laps. Wrestling wasn't added until 708BC. So, what's three thousand years of tradition, really? Throw it out. BTW - There are culinary arts events in the olympics. I wonder what the ancient Greeks would have said? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I checked. NOT an olympic event. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Well, it IS Friday night. And the skirts are quite comfortable. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Kind of the quintessential Olympic sport, isn't it? Ancient Greeks didn't make marble sculptures of people playing badminton or dancing with ribbons. They were wrestling, throwing a discus, and running. Huge mistake. I've lost respect for them. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I thought it was a pretty interesting article until he suggested we should observe freedom of speech and other freedoms out of respect and not due to the law. We have people blasting the bloody hell out kids. They don't respect a right to live. Why would they respect lesser rights? I'm not ready to trust the yohos we send to DC without written constraints. Even the ones that were put in place have been greatly erroded and continue to do so. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Your kind is tougher to find that some might think. Thought I might have found one for myself a couple of times, but alas, no. Wait! There are women who actually WANT a trophy husband? Where do I apply? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I would really like to see someone do some research that didn't have fuzzy words in it. I'm not looking to remove ALL doubt, but just something more solid. In the abstract Kallend provides, they summary of conclusions clearly says that the sample group is those who are writing the most on the subject....rotten sample group. OF COURSE the people who think there is a problem are publishing on it most prolifically. Sheesh! The second conclusion is that the nay-sayers are less credible than the agreement crowd. Wait a minute. If your sample group is those who agree, how did you evaluate those who disagree? All of the research I have seen so far focuses on what is being published and then saying what is being thought. Not necessary concurrent things, there. I'm sorry. That evidence is persuasive to a point. But then Kallend goes all condescending about someone else's evidence rather than argue on the merits and I have to question Kallend's choice of evidence as well. I'll just sit here on my fence a while longer. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Well, Bill, I think everyone can agree with you there. However, it isn't terribly helpful. Who's going to sell a firearm to someone while they are detained for psych reasons? How the heck did they get to the gun shop anyhow? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.