nathaniel

And further down that PDF from the CDC there's this bit about dermal exposure to WP and this bit about inhalation exposure Interesting. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

And then there's the CDC Toxicological Profile which says The PDF linked off of that page goes into detail on the limited studies that have been done on WP exposure. After I read it I got a tentative and mixed picture--that WP is not likely to be particularly evil in military applications, but that the stuff is pretty noxious overall. Tho I'm neither a chemist nor a toxicologist. I'll keep reading this stuff. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

note: I posted this a minute ago but had the wrong quote in here, so I deleted that one & posted this instead. On this website I found this text about WP used as a weapon So tell us now why this is comparable to the lethality & permanent effects of mustard gas and phosgene. Or tell us why this text is wrong. Or just toss some more insults at me. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Do you expect us to believe that lead and all the different types of explosives used by the military are not poisonous? What's all this stuff about green bullets and bombs under development, and tell me what it has to do with chemical weapons. Shed some light on the subject if you know so much. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

TNT is a chemical too, I suppose that makes TNT a chemical weapon according to you. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I went to the bother of digging up the Chemical Weapons Convention, and near the top there's the definitions section, which goes like this It's pretty clear to me at least that WP is not employed as a toxic chemical. It most definitely is a chemical like most of the substances in the universe, and like all chemicals you can engineer a circumstance in which it will be toxic. But the mechanism of action in the weapon is the release of heat energy, not direct chemical reactions with victims. If WP and other chemical reactions that hurt people were illegal I suppose we'd have to get rid of conventional bombs as well...with maybe a small exception for fragmentation bombs. After all it is a chemical reaction that changes the explosive from solid into gas... My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Calling incendiaries "chemical weapons" stretches the meaning of the phrase and introduces error by conflating two contexts (military and scientific). If it was included in US reports about Iraq, it was inappropriate there as well. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Excuse me, but what's the big deal? Would it be all that much different if they had been killed by bombs or by bullets, or chopped into bits with swords and pole axes? Incendiary weapons have been used in war for as long as history goes back, and probably further. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

And it's a pity that people use that word, elliptical. That happens to be a math word with precise meaning. Contemporary canopies are no more elliptical than they are circular. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

There's a bit of a chicken and egg problem here...fast food hellholes would not exist if people didn't go out and preferentially buy from them. I travel a lot for my job and I cannot think of a time when I've not been able to find something reasonably healthy. Although from time to time I actually do crave a large amount of unhealthy food. /bmi is 18 My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I believe that's why the Good Lawd invented correlation factors, p-values, and (sometimes) boolean variables. And other statistical things like that. Oh wait, I forgot that statistics doesn't apply to skydiving My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Slightly more detail coming from the CBC here. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

A jumper at my dropzone purchased a phi as his first suit, and other than not having much time to jump it on the weekends (he's a packer), I get the idea that he's having a fair time with it. I borrowed it from him for a couple jumps & it was a fine suit (I jump a GTI myself, and I'm thinking of upsizing). I only put a couple jumps on it, but my impression was that suit did fine when I took care to keep the wings inflated -- not collapsing the wings when doing a maneuver. This entails a bit of technique for instance when doing a barrel roll, which I'm at a loss to explain for lack of experience with the suit. The wings didn't seem all that keen on re-inflating when the suit wasn't belly-to-earth, although for all I know there could yet be a secret technique. It seemed to have a fairly solid construction--sturdier-seeming material than was/is being used on the GTI & the Firebird. But the suit was new, so it's a little hard for someone with very little fabric knowledge like me to predict how it'll age & wear in. If you plan to do any flocking at all you'll also want to keep in mind that the larger flocks have been going anywhere from 60-80 mph, and more toward the 80 mph end than the 60 mph end. Tall & skinny folk like me can get away easily with smaller suits like the GTi. Having a bigger suit can actually make things more difficult because we'd need to fly it dirty to get down to the flock. In terms of flocking, denser people typically benefit more from bigger wings, especially when they are still getting the hang of things. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I recall demoing a canopy a couple of years ago that was on a set of reversed risers, and I've seen them at least a couple times since then. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Anxiety attacks and panic attacks can definitely cloud your judgement, as can tunnel vision & target fixation. There's a subtler aspect of too much safety as well, in that most of us don't pursue safety as a pure end but rather as something complementary to our skydiving activities. If you pursue too much safety you'll wind up skydiving less or not at all. Considering that skydiving is outright a dangerous thing to do... if all you were concerned about is safety then you wouldn't be skydiving at all. Likewise if you insist on skydiving only when the conditions are safest, eg the weather is 100% clear, 4-6 mph winds from your preferred direction & only within 2 or 3 days of a light rain so the ground is soft etc etc you'll find that you won't have many opportunities to skydive at all. And depending on your income situation, if you spend all your money on all the latest gadgets, audibles, cutaway systems, gear designs and brightest colors there may not be room in your wallet for skydiving either. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

hmm that would be a $1700 airfare for me. But I'd get 20000 air miles, that would make me platinum My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Poison is a relative term. Water can be poisonous, air (oxygen) can be poisonous, marijuana can be poisonous. The question is what amount will it take to kill you, not can it kill you. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

What does that have to do with Ulysses S Grant? My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

I think you're pretty much on the mark here. long in advance they just quote you their regular economy rate. Cheaper fares are when discount rates are applied if/when the airline puts out promotions or tries to shore up weak demand. These only get applied in 2-3 month installments, or so it seems. And then when you get close to the actual flight the stakes get raised, because they figure they can gouge you if you really need to go, but on the other hand if you're noncommittal they'd rather have a couple hundred bucks than none if there's open seats left. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

If you want to get really hard core you can query recent historical BGP routing instability here: http://bgplay.routeviews.org/bgplay/ It does seem like there's been quite a bit of routing changes taking place with respect to this network in the last few days, tho I didn't bother to research whether they'd be affecting Cox / RR / AOLTW / etc My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Subnet on the internet is roughly akin to neighborhood in real life. It's a sometimes precise word that means "nearby", except on the internet it means in terms of technical networking details instead of strict physical proximity. Things on the same subnet are typically physically near to each other, although not always. It can be involved in figuring out if the reason you can't get from your house to his house is because of a traffic jam on the expressway or a stakeout of his house (or yours). "Class C" is just a term for the size of the subnet, 255 addresses. It's a bit of an antiquated term with a sordid history not unlike telephone area codes & exchanges. But still useful. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Song (Delta's sub airline, www.flysong.com) has a $115 from Orlando (MCO) to SJU so you could jury rig a schedule to MCO from ORD around MCO SJU for around $200. I don't think that the major travel websites search Song by default. -- oops, that's the one way fare Pan am does a flight from Orlando to San Juan, but it's $125 and the dates aren't as good, Feb 9 - Feb 12. That at least brings it to $315 or so ATA's website gives MDW SJU at $360 make it happen already My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

dude where do I sign up? My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

somehow I thought if you enter a bid you are obligated to pay if you win. Otherwise you could screw the system up. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?

Unfortunately it's the federal gov't that ends up bailing people out when the insurance companies back off. Courtesy you & me. My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?