jclalor

My favorite question is " How high do you get pulled up after your chute opens" and then you have to explain that while the camera is still going fast you are just slowing down. I still don't think half of them get it.

Nice, brings back memories.

I just got back from Syria,Lebanon and Egypt. It was pretty cool, in particular Egypt.

In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing. - Autobiography of Mark Twain

I thought this show sucked, I did not see any explanation about what attracts people to this sport other than we are just adrenaline crazed junkies. Nothing about what makes this sport challenging. I would have thought some AFF vids or RW work would have been nice.

Right before it crashes.

[What you guys won't admit is that there is approximately the same rate of homosexuality, pedophilia, murder, etc in the church/Christianity as there is outside. _________________________________________________ I really think the percentage of pedophiles, gays, and men with just all around issues involving sex are much higher than the general population in the catholic church. Any time someone commits to a life with zero sex is bound to have, or is going to have major issues with sex. When I was 12 I spent a weekend at a catholic seminary and the vast majority of guys were fucking strange.

I think one of the points being made is that you can believe what ever reality YOU wish too believe as long as it is not imposed in any way on people that don't choose to share your perception of reality. When others try and impose their superstitions on public policy it becomes a bit scary

The best definition I have heard for Skeptics or Athiest: Some people believe that skepticism is the rejection of new ideas, or worse, they confuse “skeptic” with “cynic” and think that skeptics are a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons unwilling to accept any claim that challenges the status quo. This is wrong. Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the application of reason to any and all ideas — no sacred cows allowed. In other words, skepticism is a method, not a position. Ideally, skeptics do not go into an investigation closed to the possibility that a phenomenon might be real or that a claim might be true. When we say we are “skeptical,” we mean that we must see compelling evidence before we believe. Skepticism has a long historical tradition dating back to ancient Greece, when Socrates observed: “All I know is that I know nothing.” But this pure position is sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one. If you were skeptical about everything, you would have to be skeptical of your own skepticism. Like the decaying subatomic particle, pure skepticism uncoils and spins off the viewing screen of our intellectual cloud chamber. Modern skepticism is embodied in the scientific method, which involves gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena. A claim becomes factual when it is confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer temporary agreement. But all facts in science are provisional and subject to challenge, and therefore skepticism is a method leading to provisional conclusions. Some claims, such as water dowsing, ESP, and creationism, have been tested (and failed the tests) often enough that we can provisionally conclude that they are not valid. Other claims, such as hypnosis, the origins of language, and black holes, have been tested but results are inconclusive so we must continue formulating and testing hypotheses and theories until we can reach a provisional conclusion. The key to skepticism is to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity. Over three centuries ago the French philosopher and skeptic, René Descartes, after one of the most thorough skeptical purges in intellectual history, concluded that he knew one thing for certain: Cogito ergo sum — I think therefore I am. But evolution may have designed us in the other direction. Humans evolved to be pattern-seeking, cause-inferring animals, shaped by nature to find meaningful relationships in the world. Those who were best at doing this left behind the most offspring. We are their descendents. In other words, to be human is to think: Sum Ergo Cogito — I Am Therefore I Think.

This was one of the best written I have seen on these threads. The fact is reality still exist even if you dont believe in it anymore.

QuoteThat�s OK. All college professors are America hating, left wing douchebags who smoke dope, sell our secrets to foreign governments, and usually had their first experience with oral sex at the hand of an abusive stepdad. Oh�just like all Christians are child molesters. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That was a fine Christian response, I don't believe Jesus him self could have said it better. The douchebag comment showed particular class. Out of idol curiosity did you have an abusive stepdad? or perhaps a stepchild? The sad truth is religion provides the perfect cover for pedophiles. Children and thier parents put a lot of blind faith in people who are involved with thier church and the fact is a child is way more likely to be molested by someone in thier church rather than by a stanger.

I suppose 8 years ago you were preaching the same GOP rhetoric and look what that got us. I am sure you have heard the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

WWJD on taxing the poor?

A low estimate is 20% are not insured in Alaska so by the figures you provided 1 of the rapes would have required a resolution by the city council. Hospitals are just not inclined to give stuff away for free. Just the thought of a rape victim having to grovel in front of strangers at a city council meeting is priceless. What's really disturbing if there were so few reported rapes, why would Palin even bother not to continue with the old policy? You mention the bad PR the city would get, so what do think is happening now? The only difference is it's happening to Palin. I think Jesus would be proud.

Not all women have health insurance or qualify for low income health insurance. To think that a woman would be charged in the investigation of her own rape is sick. In Palin's perfect world, the victim if pregant, would have to carry the pregnancy to term is revolting. Just another example of compassionate conservitism.

I just saw that a whole hour will be devoted to sport skydiving on the History channel Friday at 8 PM.

Quote>I may be wrong but I don't think you have the right to make comments like > that on an airliner. and I can't see the pilot letting them fly if this story is >correct. ?? Making absurd political comments has nothing to do with your ability as a passenger to safely make the flight. Sure, the pilot has a right to kick them off - but going by those standards, the pilot would have the equal right to kick off a serviceman when _he_ thought that that serviceman was a jerk. And that wouldn't seem to be a very smart approach for an airline. _____________________________________________________________________________________ I don't think if I boarded a plane and and in a loud voice accuse the passenger sitting with his wife and children in the seats in front of me of raping his children and beating his wife that I would fly very far. Board an airplane and start espousing the virtues of why we were attacked on 911 while wearing a Bin Laden T-shirt and see what that gets you. The right to free speech is not an absolute. You could say it all you want in the airport but board a plane and things change. I think that a pilot would be obligated to remove any passenger that appeared being very capable of inciting violence after a flight was airborne.

On the other hand, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, which expressly recognizes the right to free speech. I fully believe those assholes (both groups) have the right to say whatever they want. I also fully believe that the 99% of the rest of the population, including Obama supporters, has the right to tell them to fuck off I may be wrong but I don't think you have the right to make comments like that on an airliner. and I can't see the pilot letting them fly if this story is correct.

Not to take anything away from your story but I have never heard anyone, even from the extreme left make anything close to statements like that. I would have thought the airline could have denied them the flight because they posed a very real threat to the safety of the flight. To say you know who they are voting for is a very cheap shot and distracted from the story. Keep in mind what candidate has repeatedly voted against more funding for the VA and said the increased GI college funding the democrats and GOP proposed was too generous and would cause military members not to re-enlist because they could leave and get an education.

I wonder if this is just a Hollister thing, I have the same problem. I have been asking everyone I know to try and help me. One of the segments register as 23 hours when I try and upload it Next time I see Artie I'M gonna ask.

As a supporter of Obama I have to say thats kind of a stupid comment, but it probably made all of you feel better about youselves.

If a voting irregularity here and there is good enough for our President, it's good enough for me.

Well said.

I feel much better about Palin not being the next VP or president, I think she bombed with Gibson. She really had the deer in the headlights kind of look the whole time. the best line was when Gibson ask her how Alaska's close proximity to Russia could give her insight into the situation in Georgia the past few weeks and her answer was: "Their our next door neighbors here in Alaska, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska" I can see why they are keeping her far far away from the press because they will eat her alive.

If the last 8 years was so fucking wonderful why is McCain distancing himself from Bush? Why is McCain talking about change? Why do all the right wing pundits talk about how McCain is his own man, a maverick. Well if bush and the Republican congress were so great why would McCain talk about changing Washington?