Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 Author Thread: yeah, worlclassman!!
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 50 (view)
yeah, worlclassman!!
Posted: 2/12/2009 11:00:18 PM
just shut up and let the hens peck here (hehheh) Lovely bunch, no?

Can't you just feel the love?

I agree with you and that is what I did after pointing out the obvious for which I was blocked rather than receiving an apology. My puzzlement is why an educated, alleged adult would allow their child to behave in that manner then get miffed that the victim of that child's (or young adult's) behavior for pointing out same rather than correcting same and apologizing for said rude behavior. That is what honorable people and decent parents do.

I think I have found about 40 reasons why in this thread. No wonder to me that the children from single mother households fill our jails.
Of course I can't comment on same because I'm not a single mother and I am sure the ones in jail are all innocent.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 49 (view)
What about (pseudo) parents who let their children choose their friends
Posted: 2/12/2009 10:47:12 PM
(from my buddy “juzz”)
I'm thinking that you cannot read, as if you did, you would have grasped that I never stated I work for DCF or any other such governmental agency, I am a paralegal for a private family law practice,

I never said you did. You're the one who wrote
"Scary to say the least, as a family law paralegal, now I have a better understanding of as to why social services, DCF, and other agencies who are supposed to protect and advocate for children seem to be failing our children, and to think I thought it was due to cutbacks and understaffing..

I never claimed to be "any of the above". I said I was a paralegal with a human rights organization. Again, you're lost. In fact, I even mentioned your professed “paralegal” vocation. I didn't even mention child stealers except in response to your reference to them “failing our children”. Do you usually have this much of a problem with reading comprehension?

further, anyone who needs to reel off a list of women that are interested in himself, is protesting a wee too much

I'm not protesting at all. I am grateful! I am also simply illustrating a point (which is one more for you & capt dud to miss) that there are plenty of quality, non pseudo-adult women out there. Since you and others of your ilk have this fantasy that I am claiming that all women are rotten and capt dud is claiming that he can't find any quality women, it necessitates a detailed factual response that your delusions are not facts-based.

just as your need to belittle everyone who disagrees with you

You mean like
"Hey Einstein, the word is "homonym"
something like that?
Or how about
"I understand that you are attempting to put all the big words you know in one sentence to try to impress us with your pseudo intellect, but, I'm thinking that what you meant to say was "But for the plethora of you who proffer HOMONYMS AD NAUSEAM, I'll still respect you for YOUR minds. "

Unlike you, I don't belittle people for disagreeing with me. I let people's own blathering do the work for me. and I've not yet offered a "homonym"

I'd have to say any embarrassment and diminution you might be feeling here is due to being repeatedly fed your head for said blathering while trying to belittle me. Maybe if you "/sarcasm" you'd do better.

as well as proclaiming your superior intellect over the white house, congress and senate.

I said "The world is full of educated fools. Look at the white house, congress and the senate."

There is no such statement contained therein. Do you always have these cognition problems or just when you're drinking?

as for the person who stated that someone who is not a parent cannot comment on another's child rearing, I agree, you cannot make an educated comment on parenting unless you are one

And you're a paralegal? So tell me juzz, what do a a judge and jury do? Using your argument then, nobody can report child abuse unless they're a parent. And cops can't write crime reports on same unless they're a parent? And in exactly which post did I say that I have not done any child rearing? That "whooshing" sound you hear is the the last vestige of your credibility being sucked away by your glaring presumptions.

for you to say you can comment on a parent, the same way one can comment on a rapist without actually being one is illogical, a more apt comparison would be that someone without who is not a surgeon cannot comment on a surgeon's technique as they do not possess the training and experience to do so.

So one needs to be a surgeon to know that cutting off the wrong limb is not proper procedure? Even if it is your leg? And again "and you're a paralegal???"

while you may comment on how rape is a terrible crime, you cannot comment on the experience of actually being a rapist as you have not ever committed such an act, parenting is not a crime,

Wouldn't that depend on how said “parenting” is done and how the child turns out as an adult, based upon same? Do you always make such brash, groundless statements?

it is more an occupation and a lifestyle, unless you are one you do not understand the 24/7 aspects and the challenges you face in rearing a child

And where did I say in any of my writings that I had never done child rearing? You sure spend a lot of your time making up stuff to argue against.

you are hypercritical of parents, women, governmental agencies, does anyone do anything right in this world except you?

and yet another non-sequitur tossed onto the pile of hyperbole and flawed logic. I am critical of ~A~ parent so that makes me "hypercritical of parentS?" (plural) And I don't like child stealers whom several grand juries have deemed “child abusers” so I “don't like governmental agencies”. Sweetie, I work for a “governmental agency” and have worked for numerous others in the past. What you are doing is called “irrational” and more than a little foolish.

I'd have to agree with you that I don't like women, at least not most the ones in this thread. But the irony of what you write here is that when I mention a list of about 8-10 exceptional women I know, I am “bragging”. But when I mention ONE (1) woman it becomes “you are hypercritical of...women”. Has anybody told you lately that your “logic” is largely inchoate and debating skills non-existent?

And since I don't like capt. dud for being a glib, effete' snob, I guess my dislike is because he's a parent? Or it the woman or governmental agency part of him I find annoying?

those that feel the need to brag

Who is "bragging? Stating facts is not bragging. Were you bragging when you ) claimed to be a paralegal? If you don't measure up and feel inferior, that's your own low self-esteem talking to you. Maybe you should quit diggin' this hole you're in here.

are usually the most insecure about themselves, so maybe look in the mirror and work on yourself before finding fault with others

Well "Einstein", who jumped into the middle of whom with both feet? I didn't come knocking at your door. You came pounding on mine. If you'd just sat there quietly and kept your verbal onanism to yourself I'd not have found myself gasping in awe at the ignorance of some of your writings. But you chose to take me on so live with the results. I come seeking the wisdom of other minds and instead of advice, I get a collection of distempered tunas ranting at me...well technically, ranting at their their own imaginings...but you get the point. No...I guess you wouldn't.

Pass the mustard blesses us with

You really didn’t need to offer a dictionary definition of the term ‘ad hominem’; the above three quotes were sufficient examples. Brilliant way to illustrate your point, though.

Thank you. I did do rather good job of illustrating something more often called “illustration” or “exhibition”. But alas, your “illustration” is not quite correct. The definition states "Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason

The logic and reason are there as well as the “personal considerations”. Let me drag you along into the light of the wonders of the English language.

The words are too big for her, that is how she got confused

she claims to be a "paralegal" and didn't understand what "ad hominem" is, although it is a recognized tactic in legal forensics and can be found in virtually every law dictionary out there. She then complained about "big words" in my writing. Ergo, my statement is neither illogical nor without reason. (That's one down )

...and juzz claims to be a paralegal with a family law firm

(from juss post 51)
as a family law paralegal

(That's two down, mustard)

And lastly:

"Like you, they're oft-times marginally coherent and incapable of understanding simple English."

Well, mus, don't know if you're defending the child-stealers or juzzz here. Ever read any perjury-filled "social studies"? Ever watch social workers and their lawyers hack families to pieces in court? Ever hear the stories from kids how they were strip-searched and humiliated without cause or warrant? Ever see 'em snag kids on anonymous tips and haul them off without a shred of probative evidence? Ever been a cop? A mandated reporter? A paralegal? A human rights activist? A “C.A.S.A.” ? Ever read the Alicia WAde case. Ever hear of Wenatchee, Washington? McMartin Preschool? Lilliana Lopez? Did you see the series of articles in the Riverside Press called "Neglecting the Neglected" for which I was an information source?
Didn't think so.
So how can you state that my comment is sans logic or reason?
As far as juzz goes she didn't understand the lexicon of her purported trade, she doesn't understand "big words", and her arguments have been consistently nonsensical to the point of being babble. That would make up both the requisite "logic" and "eason" for my comments. So, your chosen cites don't "appeal to personal considerations rather than logic or reason" Nice try though. At least you were more-or-less polite in your attempt at your own ad hominem.

Wishes writes
One woman / One Teenager does not mean that Women and Children are all the same.

I agree, wishes. But you know what is funny,? I didn't see anything I wrote anywhere that says otherwise. Do you always make stuff up and then argue against your own imaginings?

But then again, you know what "they" say .. "Those that can't do ~ Teach"

They also run their pie-holes in forums, making up arguments & arguing against their own delusional fabrications. Thanks for showing us how it is done!

I like the idea of a school for mothers. Most of you wouldn't make the cut though and I don't grade on a curve.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 43 (view)
What about (pseudo) parents who let their children choose their friends
Posted: 2/12/2009 6:53:22 PM
Nahh, Jennyrose. The words are too big for her, that is how she got confused. I'll define for her here.

Gotta love "juzz" ; a textbook "felame"

"Hey Einstein, the word is "homonym""

Sorry juzzy borden but you're wrong, as Jenny just pointed out: Let me help you improve your vocabulary. ad hominem: Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives. They should also avoid arguments with people obviously more intelligent that they.

"I understand that you are attempting to put all the big words you know in one sentence to try to impress us with your pseudo intellect"

...and juzz claims to be a paralegal with a family law firm.... Hey juzz, the people from whom I was protecting kids from in three different courts (Juvenile, Family and Appellate) were your good buddies @ DPSS/CPS. Like you, they're oft-times marginally coherent and incapable of understanding simple English. Since you have some illusion that CPS "protectes" kids, I'd suggest that you learn a little about your buddies. I'd suggest the Santa Clara Grand jury report on CPS, The 2 San Diego Grand Jury reports on CPS, the books "Lawyers for Children" & "In the Best Interest of the Child" and a plethora of 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th and 14th Amendment law, annotated.

These aren't "big words"...well at least not to me. I can see you're having problems though Again, sorry if I write over your head. Maybe if you pick up something other than the national enquirer you'll do better in the future.

"ummm...perchance you meant to say "...YOUR children..." , and yes, he is delightful, polite, and plays well with others."

Obviously learned it from his father If he's all that I'd just bet that he passes along messages to the adult in the house when calls come in (“Adult” obviously referring to his father, again)

""Thou doth protest a bit too much"

Maybe. Since it is “too much”, I'll just give you and capt. dud the short list.
There's the ex-LAPD officer who is now a paralegal in a government defense law firm...
And there's the 911 dispatcher...
There's the severe disability teaching aide who is also a small business owner
There's the other small business owner who pays more in quarterly taxes than the average family earns in a year
There's the retired RN who has done charity medical work all over the world
There's the professional artist & the retired Mortgage Banker. There's the nurse who runs the nursing staff for a convalescent hopsital in Az., the Surgery Tech, the MA in Texas, the law school student on the other side of town here. This doesn't even take into consideration the other people with just average employment but still "quality women" and better still, great people. Not a “felame” in the bunch.
Sorry You can't find any, capt. dud. Guess you and your sheepskin just don't count for much in teh real world, huh? I'm sure that if you stay at it you can find some who aren't real bright whom you can impress with your credentials. This thread seems to have quite a few, actually. There's an old saying out there: "the only common link in your chain of bad relationships is you". A analogy can be drawn here. If you can't find quality women and the rest of us can, the problem is you, not the other guys. Unlike you, I actually like the fact that most guys (you included) are egocentric jerks, full of themselves. It makes it easier for those of us who aren't to find quality women who aren't willing to settle.

Juzz goes on to write:
"Yes there are, as well as grammar errors ."

Which she carefully declines to note (as she can't), making this post the forensic equivalent of "I know the answer but I am not going to tell you", a la PeeWee Herman.

"Let's see, FELAME = FEMALE (oooohhhh, how clever}
so therefore, you are typifying Forum Forg as....gasp....a female"

Your words, not mine. BTW, what is a “forg”? And since we're criticizing typos, what is a "tounge"?

Then we have this non sequitur from “San”, ( as in “SAN's logic” apparently) with said sentiments proffered also by a couple of others
“How refreshing a non-parent putting down an actual parent's commitment to their children, clearly it's for the best that you don't have children Tyme because you sir are clearly an overgrown child.”

Overlooking the ad Hominem (take note, Jizz, of the proper use of said term) in lieu of cogent, facts-based arguments, let's look at the blatant illogic of her non-sequitur statement. <----(you can look that one up too, jizz) Saying that one who doesn't have children can't criticize a pseudo parent (“Pseudo” because they're letting the child make the adult's decisions for them) is like stating that one can't criticize a rapist because one has never been a rapist; nor a drunk driver because one has never been a drunk driver; nor a doctor who cuts off the wrong limb because one has never been a doctor who cut off a wrong limb. So in your “thinking”, if (for example) a parent spends quality time with a child beating same and inserting a hot curling iron into that child's orifices, as occurred here locally, others shouldn't be able to criticize same because they never had a child? Admirable “thinking” there, “Sans” (et al).

BEW (I guess the "P" was taken) writes
”So...coming across an educated woman should have been a red flag? LOL”

No, being invited to spend time having a dialog with one with a master's degree should be a red flag. The world is full of educated fools. Look at the white house, congress and the senate. I say “red flag“ because as is illustrated by this felame and Capt dud, the overly-educated seem devoid of what is wrongly called “common sense”. I am a production controller in one of the world's largest engineering firms and work with “masters” every day. When the electric door at work doesn't open, the "masters" stand and stare at it, then wander off to look for help. The rest of us push it open. When those who are literally “rocket scientists” can't get their cars started, or can't cahnge a flat tire even with instructions, people such as I troubleshoot it and get them on their way or tell them what needs fixing and what it should cost. That is because while most people are learning how the world works and how to make it work for them by so doing, the aspiring “masters” (“masters” of sitting in class) are sitting in a classroom listening to a leftover hippy drone on about the evil of America and the joys of Marxism.

Capt Dud writes:
“Please keep your rants to yourself, or edit.”

I have a better idea, dud. How about if you just don't read them? Last I heard the first amendment was still in place in spite of the PC police. By that same token, nobody is forcing you to read or offer your maudlin comments on something you find offensive. Or, if the posts here are beyond your delicate tastes, you could refrain from commenting on same unless you have an on-topic comment. So I'll toss it back to you, dud. Exactly WHAT is the "on-topic" substance of your masterful comments here? If you insist on posting off-topic comments and insults, as you just did, you're just a troll.

(Dud then follows that with)
“You're giving the rest of the male population a bad name.”

Well thanks for giving me power over “the rest of the male population” but really you're too generous. “The rest of the male population” does fine on its own. An example would be your brilliant statement:

Heck, we have enough problems dating good women as it is.

“We”? I have no problem whatsoever. If ~YOU~ can't find them the problem is ~YOU~, not me.
~I~ do fine (see above).

Dud, I'd offer you some advice on how to find "quality women" , like "avoid women with Master's degrees who let their children make their decisions for them ", but you'd not understand because you live in that land of illusion where you can't see reality through your sheepskin.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 33 (view)
What about (pseudo) parents who let their children choose their friends
Posted: 2/4/2009 10:25:11 PM
so many targets of opportunity, so little time. Sorry I don't have time for all of you but don't feel left out if I didn't get you. Most are still amusing, like watching car wrecks in slow motion.

I am amused, but not surprised, that the females are about 95% in accord with the controlling daughter. Now I know where such children come from & why. Thanks for validating my suspicions. I notice that the guys, for the must part, are on the other side of the equation since they have had to put up with your controlling and manipulative children. Any surprises there?

To those who aSSume that I don't like children, you're dead wrong. I have done pro-bono paralegal advocacy for children with an international human rights organization. I have picked numerous families up out of the rubble and helped them and their kids succeed in life. I don't like rude, controlling children, or rude controlling adults, for that matter.

To Azbeth (and others) sorry if I write over your heads & use more than 3 & 4 word sentences. I'll try and dumb down in the future. Better?

Ironically, in this collection of 1-3 liner ad hominems, I have noted that most are so busy ranting that few of the respondents are cogent enough to address the actual question. Most of these responses are the intellectual equivalent of "I know you are but what am I?" But for the plethora of you who proffer ad hominems in lieu of cogent arguments, I'll still respect you for you minds

Now, on to the fun part:

juzz writes: "well, duh, the child that answered the phone turned out to be her own, call CNN, breaking news..."
so that is an excuse for rudeness? I'll bet you children are delightful little things.....

and then: "So what, the daughter forgot to tell her, boo hoo, I think you are reading waaayyy too deeply into things and transferring your persecution complex into a conspiracy between mother and daughter rather than simple forgetfulness."

Thanks Dr. Freud, I'm all better now. Oh but, funny, but the daughter didn't say she forgot. She admitted to her making a choice to be rude. Instead of apologizing for said rudeness by her offspring, mom just went along. I like the way you make excuses for "rude" (see just previous comment) Now what is that old saying about assuming? Golly Doc, now what?

Lil Booker: Remember me? Yes, please, if they're like you, yes, please do remember and avoid me and DO tell your friends. It'll save me time sorting the brilliant & rational from the "also rans".

Me-2: I get more "interest" than I have time to entertain. What obviously escapes you is that there are strong women out there who think on their own and enjoy a guy who's got a mind & a spine & is not afraid to use either rather than just being a life support system for genitalia (was that too long for you, Azbeth?)

Forum frog, there are no misspellings. Maybe you should have someone help you through any words you don't recognize. "felames" is not a typo. You might wish to look up the word "anagram". "Felames" is an anagram containing a statement that is over your head, ergo you'd typify same. Your response to my post just illustrated said anagram. (Thank you!)

Thumbs up to "sheilarodri". She figured it out, as did a few others who have been down this road.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 14 (view)
Need help!!!
Posted: 2/3/2009 8:22:13 PM

Internet Dating Rule No. 1: In real life, nobody is exactly the way they seem on-line.

Internet Dating Rule No. 2: Your odds might be good, but the goods might be odd.

Internet Dating Rule No. 3: No guts, no glory.

to add to these oh-so-true pearls of wisdom by faith, hope, love:

Dating Rule No. 4: The guy who says all the right words is the player who listens to what you say and mirrors it back to you to get into your knickers.

Women don't want unvarnished truth from a potential new victim....errrrr "male friend". They want to hear the "magic words" they [u]want[/u] (READ: "Demand") to hear even if said insincerely. This while ignoring guys who are 100% honest with them but DON'T say the "magic words". This way they can complain that they got lied to and blame the guy and presume and proclaim that "ALL GUYS ARE JERKS" all the while ignoring the honest ones (READ: Actually "non-jerks") who are too honest to lie to them to get laid.

Its an acquired skill you females seem to have...
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 1 (view)
What about (pseudo) parents who let their children choose their friends
Posted: 2/3/2009 8:10:52 PM
I just had a dialog going with an alleged adult female with a master's degree (should have been a red flag), who told me to call her. I called and got a snippy felame on the phone who it turned out was her child (2nd red flag: a parent who doesn't warn you that they have another answering the phone). After a brief dialog it finally came out that this was not "Sue" but her daughter (3rd red flag, a parent who raises a child with no more manners than to NOT identify herself even though i specifically asked for "Sue") and said daughter didn't bother to tell her mother that I called. When I made "Sue" aware of that call, she told me her daughter had told her nothing about it (4th red flag, a child without a conscience) "Sue" finally queried her daughter her daughter told her that she though ~I~ was "impolite". (5th red flag, mom doesn't even ask about the conversation, just accepts rude, control-freak daughter's word for it)

I basically made the same points (except #1) to the (pseudo)mom in a mail after she told her daughters opinion (as if I cared) and rather than respond, she blocked me

I am not, per se, put off by this as I have lost nothing if she is a parent who jumps through hoops held out by that child.
Since that is the case it would be better to end sooner rather than later because it would end in any event at the whimsy of the child/"adult" child, regardless.

That "end" could occur by a decision made FOR the (pseudo)parent or by the party of the second part throwing in the towel to avoid the pitfalls of trying to navigate around wholly irrelevant standards imposed by a childish 3rd party with whom that person is not involved but who still gets to dictate policy, nonetheless.

What do you folks do when you run into a pseudo-adult being manipulated by one of these runt-sized (or larger) tyrants? Same thing I would have done; i.e. tell mom to call back when she grows up? (the pseudo-parent, no the kid)

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 26 (view)
Inventions you'd like to see!
Posted: 10/4/2008 10:56:30 AM
instruction manuals and warning labels for women wouldn't work. The manual would need to be revised every 5 seconds or so, so all we'd ever do is read. Then they wouldn't be able to walk from the weight of all the warning labels stuck on 'em.
Well maybe they could just take the plates of the backs of fire engines:
might work.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 21 (view)
Inventions you'd like to see!
Posted: 9/27/2008 6:18:32 PM
"I wanna see a lie detector surgically implanted into all politicians that would knock them out if they try something underhanded as well as setting off an alarm."

there wouldn't be a single conscious poll-itician left in the world (as if there is now) and the screaming alarms would keep us all awake 24/7
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 24 (view)
Posted: 8/28/2005 8:48:36 PM
Sassy, do the non-superficial guys of the world a favor: don't get plastic boobs.
(*) (*)<---TONK! TONK! (the sound of tapping on an overinflated balloon)
plastic boobs are as insincere and phoney as a man rolling up a pair of socks and stuffing them down the front of his pants. All show, no go.

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 14 (view)
Quite interested...hehe
Posted: 8/28/2005 1:55:07 PM
and the ones that are saying that i don't have my stuff together b/c i'm not in college or whatever reason why they say that..

Its because you have three children by three guys, two of whom are jailbirds and you're like 22. OR did you miss all that in your own writings as well as the responses?

well you have no idea what i'm doing...

Yeah we do. You're irrseponsibly popping out babies from guys who probably shouldn't be allowed to reproduce. You told us that

you have no idea how together i have it...

Again, yes we do. And you don't have it together or you'd not be a momX3 at youre age without a single father, a LTR or marriage in the picture and some way of supporting yourself and your kids.

i've been dealt with some pretty harsh things but i've managed to stay above it all...

xx, from what you write, you have NOT, I repeat NOT "been dealt" anything. You made choices and this is the result of your choices. You opened those choices up to public scrutiny and you got HONEST responses. You chose to dump on those giving you honest responses even though they were close to 100% in unison. Again, this shows how much you don't have it together and how you somehow think that someone else is somehow responsible for your reaping the rewards of your own bad decisions. You apparently think that the rest of us should feel sorry for you because those choices turned out EXACTLY like 98.999% of rational adults would expect them to.

xx, Your new profile is much better.
Maybe you can find another guy with whom you can "accidentally" get pregnant for the 4th time.

If you wanna snivel about me being harsh because I was honest, go for it. I have big shoulders, I can carry the burden...
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 4 (view)
Environmental Issues:We need balance folks
Posted: 8/25/2005 3:21:12 PM

Kind of a coincidence the ozone hole appears over Antarctica during southern hemisphere winters when that part of the earth is pointed away from the sun.

Its also kind of a concidence that the south polar ozone hole appears right over the top of Mt. Erebus, which is spewing millions of tons of CFCs into the air, and that it was even larger when Mt. Pinatubo was also spewing CFCs into hte upper atmosphere at the same time.
Maybe it ISN'T a "coincidence"
Thus, Mt. Erebus spews out over 150,000 tons of HF in the Antarctica stratosphere. Only 2,480 tons per year of fluorine are theoretically released by the alleged breakup of CFCs. Even more curious is that most CFCs are produced in the northern hemisphere, yet little to no corresponding ozone thinning has occurred at the north pole!

Volcanoes Volcanoes spew particulate matter and aerosols into the stratosphere. Sulfate aerosols from volcanoes appear to play an important natural role in ozone depletion. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) reacts with water to form sulfuric acid (H2SO4) in an aerosol form. Results include the reflection of incoming solar radiation and the conversion of inactive chlorine species such as HCl and ClONO2 to more active types. In this way, these aerosols act much like the polar stratospheric clouds with reactions occurring on their surfaces. The resultant active chlorine species, such as ClO and Cl, readily react with and destroy ozone.
After the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991, some scientists predicted a 12% decrease in ozone for the winter of 1992-1993. A 15% decrease actually resulted. They also predicted that the antarctic polar vortex would last longer, and there is some evidence that it did.

Volcanic plumes contain sulfate aerosols, which play a large natural role in ozone depletion. Included in these aerosols are large amounts of hydrogen chloride (HCl). Some scientists argue that the amount of chlorine put into the stratosphere by a major volcanic eruption rivals that of anthropogenically produced chlorine.

Golly GEE! I guess the eco-nazi's were just over-playing their game a bit, huh?
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 19 (view)
What is with men just wanting sex??
Posted: 8/24/2005 9:23:40 PM
I do angel. My apologies for the jerks out there.
There is a certain amount of flawed psychology behind their doing that. Per what I read, they act that way particularly with attractive women because they feel unworthy and "know" in their own thought patterns that they will be rejected by whoever it is tow whom they wrote; i.e. their past experiences have shown them to be, at least in their own minds, "losers". Because they perceive that they will be rejected, they do what they do for shock value. They "know" that they don't stand a chance of getting anyplace and figure that they're going to get tossed anyhow, so they try and hurt, disgust, scare or shock the very person to whom they are attracted.
In other words, commit a sort of e-suicide, sort of the same kind of thinking that goes into "I'll teach them, I'll kill myself".
The good part is, it makes those of us who are self-confident enough, or smart enough to NOT do that, look that much better. The way I got it figgered, if a woman wants to "go there" with me, she'll let me know. If not, that's fine too.
The sad part is that some of these guys would do FINE if they weren't such "Alpha Hotels" right off the bat.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 9 (view)
Sugestions pls
Posted: 8/24/2005 9:09:17 PM
how's wut?
the spelling go all better, for sure
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 419 (view)
one for you too
Posted: 8/24/2005 6:09:12 PM
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
You have a Nose
like a B-52
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
A little constructive criticism?
Posted: 8/24/2005 6:06:02 PM
good luck...dude......
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
Help.....Need Profile review
Posted: 8/24/2005 6:03:48 PM
drop everything before "I'm a professional" except "hello"
Get a better pic. Webcams are NOT our friends. Several better pics would be better.
Other than that it looks, if not exciting, at least pleasant, sincere and non-threatening.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
need less to say im all ears
Posted: 8/24/2005 6:00:43 PM
your first three pics are good. they go downhill from there and the others should be saved for use "as needed" i.e., if you hook up with a party animal

Your "about me" part, the numbered sayings, says little about you and reads like a cut and paste.
The bottom part about legs is really not a strong selling point. you don't need to emphasize to women that a young guy is looking for sex. I think they know that.
best, bet, go read woody's profile writing tips
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
Profiles should go metric..ask me why.
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:56:02 PM

You forgot "stones" as well
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 17 (view)
What is with men just wanting sex??
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:51:35 PM
Although I don't believe that you were addressing me in particular (or maybe you wre but no matter) just a thought on your post. macon guy. I am only a "jerk" with people who need jerkin' around, mostly liberals.
In the real world I treat fe-creatures like the precious commodities which they are. Same with my fe-pals online. With people/strangers in general, they get treated with the amount of respect which their behavor warrants.
It must be working because I don't suffer from lack of female companionship.....
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 11 (view)
check my profile pic out is it just me or am i ugly cos no one talks to me
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:47:25 PM
lose the tongue pic and the two in beanies. They kind of cheapen who/what you are. The other pics are fine but it wouldn't hurt to follow OP's suggestion.
Cut and paste the text portion of your post into a program that has spellcheck, then put the corrected version back into here.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
I'm another who sort of gave up, so tried to be funny in my profile...
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:39:47 PM
hey I LOVE it!!! but then again I am a dumb redneck, ask any doper, so what the hell do I know?
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 4 (view)
Re-Did my profile..................................Again..What do you think??
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:37:50 PM
that "piece of crap truck" gets several purchase offers a month from guys who dumped money into new, shiny trucks that don't work for poop.
But yeah, kinda like that....
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 14 (view)
Military victories are crafted with overwhelming force and an unconditional surrender war goal.
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:28:11 PM
double agent wrote
more people have died in Christ's name than any other

Actually DA more have died in Karl Marx's name than any others. Sorry, but facts is facts

The President himself does not define this as a religous crusade.

To our side it isn't. To their's it is. Read and learn, DA

We were very effective in Vietnam, I believe killing dozens of Viet Cong for every one of our servicemen that gave their lives. Where was the victory there friend?

Actually the numbers were much higher. The north admits 2,000,000 KIA to our 58,000, not counting the loss of VC et al.
The "victory" was wrenched from the military by the simpering, whimpering dogs at home; those like the klintions, hanoi jane, joan baez, teddy kennedy,john f-in sKerry, etc. and the same type who are posting against the US war efforts in this POF forum. They're all of the same worthless fabric as Neville Chamberlain and the Vichy French. Their sycophantic, boot-licking role towards the true aggressors cost the US an additional 48,000 lives in vietnam plus millions more in vietnam and in the other "dominoes" which fell to communism after the US went home. Likewise will be the results in this war if America loses its resolve or pays any attention to those same folks, version 2.3. Today we're fighting them on their turf. If we don't hold the line there they will be back on our turf again, and may be anyhow. We had won all the battles and the north would have crumbled if not for them and you can believe that our opposition in this war is likewise taking notes.

Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap
Born: 1912
Place of Birth: An Xa, Vietnam
Military University: none
Wars Fought:
-World War II
-First Indochina War(French-Indochina War 1946-1954)
-Second Indochina War(Vietnam War 1965-1972)
-Third Indochina War 1979-81
Vietnam War:
Gen. Giap planned and directed the military operations against the French that culminated in their defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. During the 1960's Giap controlled guerrilla operations against South Vietnam and the United States and planned the Tet Offensive of 1968.

In his book, Giap clearly indicated that NVA troops were without sufficient supplies, and had been continually defeated time and again. By 1968, NVA morale was at it's lowest point ever. The plans for "Tet" '68 was their last desperate attempt to achieve a success, in an effort to boost the NVA morale. When it was over, General Giap and the NVA viewed the Tet '68 offensive as a failure, they were on their knees and had prepared to negotiate a surrender.

At that time, there were fewer than 10,000 U.S. casualties, the Vietnam War was about to end, as the NVA was prepared to accept their defeat. Then, they heard Walter Cronkite (former CBS News anchor and correspondent) on TV proclaiming the success of the Tet '68 offensive by the communist NVA. They were completely and totally amazed at hearing that the US Embassy had been overrun. In reality, The NVA had not gained access to the Embassy--there were some VC who had been killed on the grassy lawn, but they hadn't gained access. Further reports indicated the riots and protesting on the streets of America.

According to Giap, these distorted reports were inspirational to the NVA. They changed their plans from a negotiated surrender and decided instead, they only needed to persevere for one more hour, day, week, month, eventually the protesters in American would help them to achieve a victory they knew they could not win on the battlefield
. Remember, this decision was made at a time when the U.S. casualties were fewer than 10,000, at the end of 1967, beginning of 1968.

(From Giaps autobiography)

Saturday, May 1, 2004 10:57 a.m. EDT

Gen. Giap Thanks Kerry & Co. for Anti-war Protests

Celebrating the 29th anniversary of the fall of Saigon, the North Vietnamese general who led his forces to victory said Friday he was grateful to leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, one of whom was presidential candidate John Kerry.
"I would like to thank them," said Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, now 93, without mentioning Kerry by name. "Any forces that wish to impose their will on other nations will surely fail," he added.
Reuters, which first reported Giap's comments, suggested that the former enemy general was mindful of Kerry's role in leading some of the highest-profile anti-war protests of the entire Vietnam War.
Before the British wire service quoted Gen. Giap, it noted:
"The Vietnam War, known in Vietnam as the American War, has become a hot issue in the U.S. presidential race with Democrat John Kerry drawing attention to his service and President Bush's Republicans disparaging Kerry's later anti-war stand."
North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin, who served under Gen. Giap on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam's unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, Col. Tin explicitly credited leaders of the U.S. anti-war movement, saying they were "essential to our strategy."
"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement," Col. Tin told the Journal.
Visits to Hanoi by Kerry anti-war allies Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and others, he said, "gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."
"We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war," the North Vietnamese military man explained.
Kerry did much the same thing in widely covered speeches such as the one he delivered to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April 1971.
"Through dissent and protest [America] lost the ability to mobilize a will to win," Col. Tin concluded.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 13 (view)
Military victories are crafted with overwhelming force and an unconditional surrender war goal.
Posted: 8/24/2005 4:59:26 PM
again grog, this is your idea of "substance" or "debate"
You're one sad little puppy
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 21 (view)
To USA members: July 7, 2005. I'm honoured to be your neighbour
Posted: 8/24/2005 4:57:45 PM

We almost didn't survive clintion I and it was he and his incompetence who brought us to the point that we had to invade iraq an afghanistan with far too few troops, to keep terrorist dogs our of our nation. I would boldly suggest that if you think "clinton II' is such a great idea that you invite her to run YOUR nation into the ground.
Thanks, Original Poster. It is good to know that there is a leats one rational person left north of the border.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 24 (view)
Newspeak, Doublethink and America.
Posted: 8/24/2005 4:32:44 PM
smirk wrote:
or forget for a second that Bush lied

What was that lie to which you allude, Smirk? Be careful now because by now you should know that baseless opinions don't get left standing unchallenged here....I already have the links to slap down this allegation, ANY allegation which you might toss out regarding stated 'casus belli', so do your homework up front. The only lies I see him telling are about open borders, how our nation is "safer" in spite of said open borders and a "need" for "guest workers"

not every soilder has a grasp on the situation and what they are fighting for.

I would hazard to say that THEY know better than you, especially in light of your first comment which I just quoted.

Most are probally just following orders from the Warists.

The "warists" don't give orders to the troops. See just-made comment about you not having a grasp on the situation. The "warists" are those who are blowing up civilians & innocents all over the world in honor of their phoney "god", or did you forget about that aspect of these events?

but do you really think most Muslims fighting against the Americans really think about this stuff,

Absolutely. don't you EVER read anything about what is going on all over the world? These islaomfascists are not just "fighting Americans" Let me give you one word as an example: "Beslan"

or are they just going with there gut instinct

No, but YOU are.

let alone years upon years of oppression from the west.

Please define this term. I mean you must have SOME factual basis for alleging that the west is somehow "oppressing" "the east". Or is this just more "feel-good" stuff?

Did the mideast try and stop America when they attempted to create a super state that expanded from Maine to California?

This is humor, right?
Do you think that they would NOT have if they'd had the ability to do so?
IF so, you know nothing about koranic teachings.

Hey RP, have you noticed that grog seems absolutely incapable of giving a straight answer to a single question directed at him or providing one corrborative fact to back his opnions? He'd kinda pathetic if he wasn't so obnoxious
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 18 (view)
Spelling: it's good for you!
Posted: 8/24/2005 3:13:25 PM
wow,selticar. That was AWESOME!!!!

Why am I not surprised about the finger?
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 4 (view)
Sugestions pls
Posted: 8/24/2005 3:07:45 PM
spellcheck, spellcheck, spellcheck. "vales"? There were other problems too
Crop the pic of you with the sunset to bring you up a little.
Ditto with OP on the quad pic.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 7 (view)
low rating
Posted: 8/24/2005 3:03:57 PM
Hmm, and this is coming from someone without a picture. I don't think you're really in much of a position to comment on picture ratings, let alone offering comments spitting venom. I'd like to see you do that without a paper bag over your head.

Hermit, I have several pictures on my profile. What does that prove?
ANSWER: Nothing
And speaking of spitting venom, nice job!
Would oyu be so kind as to point out the "venom"ous parts of my post?
His question was about his profile and picture rating 'cause they aren't working. My post addressed both. If he's pulling a 1 to a 2.92 and is unhappy with same, obviousy HIS ideas aren't working. To me, the reason they aren't is obvious to me but not so to him.
It doesn't take a scientist to figure that out although it appparently escapes you.
He was smart enough to seek out feedback so he got it.
Whether or not he's smart enough to act on any of it remains to be seen.
RE:paperbag; if it keeps me from seeing your uglybugly it would probably be a worthwhile effort.
Actually, you do have a couple of nice pics on your profile. You should keep the tree and waterfall and dump the ones of you....(hehhe)
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
bout this rating system
Posted: 8/24/2005 2:53:27 PM
you're a 5.58 in here anyhow. IF you look at the culmulative numbers that is actually rather good. it seems that most the ones rated much higher seem to be those suffering from "bimbo/slut-itis"
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 173 (view)
Why is smoking pot a crime?
Posted: 8/24/2005 2:28:12 PM
you would, speedo boy.
I'd suspect that you do that a lot.
That clearly indicates that by your own admission you're a sociopath, as is common among the MJ users and as was noted in several of those links I posted.
It could also be indicative of the degradation in brain function caused by MJ.
Thank you for so lucidly illustrating that fact.

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 21 (view)
I have a question for the supporters of President George Bush’s “War on terror”.
Posted: 8/24/2005 11:31:41 AM
your problem grog, is that your snippy little posts are usually such a vague, misdirected assortement of ad hominems and generalities one can't even tell about what it is you're snivelling. It is amply clear however, that like most on the left, facts mean nothing to you and it would apear that you're either incapable of assimilating same or just to intellectualy lazy to evern read them, finding comfort in using a visual version of fingers-in-the-ears and "la-la-la" to avoid learning any truths which conflict with your bigoted ideas. It is also amply clear that you can find NO facts to support your opinion and often have no clue of the realities about that which of which you rant or you would have proffered same.
This is to say, you lose. The basic tenets of debating are to succinctly state your case with corrborative sources, and permit the opposing party do do the same. You then attempt to counter or rebut the opponents case. You fail dismally on ALL points. You have proved yourself a most unworthy opponent not just to me but to anybody to whom you've been tossing out the "neener, neeners".
Your only value is as an illustration of how NOT to debate and how NOT to behave if you wish to be taken seriously as an adult.
smerk wrote:
Say it all you want, but you even know there are other countries that were WAY worse off then Iraq.

Really? name some. Bush did in his Axis of evil speech but the only one that MIGHT be worse off at that time was China. China is the elephant in the living room and is nuclear-armed. It is not feasible to take down a nation like china with the remnants of the military that was left after 8 years of "Sodom-inside-the-beltway", short of a first strike nuclear strike to decimate their military, hardly a reasonable tactic. There are other ways to deal with China. Saddam was sonsoring terrorism against hte US as well as killing his own people by, if not "the millions" at least by the hundreds of thousands but at this point in time there are least 1,000,000 Iraqi's reported missing by their families.
You fine folks who are opposed to this war would have likewise sat by and done nothing while Hitler murdered his millions.
Strike that. There IS a difference. Because of CBW technology saddam had the potential to do more damage over the long run.
If you can define a difference between what saddam was doing, and what Hitler was doing, please.....share it with us.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 3 (view)
Be a loyal American and support the Police
Posted: 8/24/2005 11:17:48 AM
It would seem to me that the obvious solution to this problem wound be to NOT hold, or attend, raves. They have the same thing up here in the high desert and just about every one turns into a disaster with or without the cops "raiding" the things. Drugs and remote areas at night tend to test & prove Darwin's theory on "survival of the fittest". People fall off cliffs, get lost and are not found for days, get run over by vehicles, get the crap beat out of them by other "partygoers", get raped...all the things that make parties FUN!
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 10 (view)
Anyone care to rate my profile?
Posted: 8/23/2005 11:39:43 PM
lose paragraphs 1,2,5, 8 and 10.
Change pix and lose he guitar pic. the other makes you kinda look like mel gibson, much better pic. The guitar pic is VERY common in here and even for those, that's a pretty "not good" one.
Pay no attention to the bimbo's feedback. If she knew anything about men she wouldn't have to market herself with her a$$
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
low rating
Posted: 8/23/2005 11:03:16 PM
be glad for your 2.92. From looking at your profile you have a REAL small market for what you're selling. Your text portion of your profile needs to be run through a spell checker. waht you write conflicts with what your pictures show. poor writing and mixed messages don't sell well. You should be a hit with the girls looking for"bad boys"
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 3 (view)
would like some constructive critisism
Posted: 8/23/2005 10:58:45 PM
Great "deer-in-the-headlights" photo. I hope that is what you were shooting for.
I think your looks warrant something a little more professional but I could be wrong.
There are 8 million pictures in here of guys with drums and guys with guitars.
You wrote well. good punctation and spelling. Good vocabulary. That is a rarity among the propellor-heads in here.
Lose the star trek stuff. TMI. If you check dating interests and "star trek" you will probably find it is 100% guys. Look at the dating interests for women. See what they like. I am pretty sure that it isn't going to be real heavy with chicks in "drums", "star trek" or "computer networking".
If you want to catch rabbits, you need to use a carrot for bait, not a drum set, if you get my drift. Adjust your profile to the ideas expressed by women whom you find interesting. If you date, you will have to learn to do things which interest your intended prey. I know that the idea is unpleasant by ya might as well start now. Make sure that you mention tht you replace the toilet tissue when it is empty and put the seat back down.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 9 (view)
Wow, I just saw the best profile ever!
Posted: 8/23/2005 10:50:17 PM

I tihnk somebody needs to read more profiles.....
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 3 (view)
ok lemme have it
Posted: 8/23/2005 10:45:12 PM
I think you're probably going to get responses from the more cerebral females out there. that can be a blessing. Proof for typos and grammar.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 15 (view)
What is with men just wanting sex??
Posted: 8/23/2005 10:27:53 PM
well now, no guys write to me looking for sex. Go figger.....
There was a bit of a prrrrrrroblem (to borrow from Dr. Rrrrrruth westheimer) with your profile. Go read the tips on writing profiles at the top of the "profiles" thread. Too many guy read "sex" into everything. You say "I want to find a tennis partner", they read "I want sex with some who plays tennis".
Be glad when a guy is right up front about wanting to drag you into bed without even asking your name. Then you know he's a jerk and can block him right away.
It's kinda like have "boorish oaf" tattoed on his forehead. It saves you a lot of time and heartache.

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 2 (view)
Re-Did my profile..................................Again..What do you think??
Posted: 8/23/2005 10:17:06 PM
good profile. Creative and unique. The only problem is that in one pic you look like an elephant.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 19 (view)
I have a question for the supporters of President George Bush’s “War on terror”.
Posted: 8/23/2005 5:28:49 PM
Oh dear, oh dear!!! Poor tyme gypsy!
So many words; so little to say!!

This is your idea of "subtance"?
Poor little grog. So many one liners and ad hominems with abslutely NOTHING intelligent to say. Groggy, If this is the best you can do, why bother?
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 115 (view)
Why is smoking pot a crime?
Posted: 8/23/2005 2:02:35 AM
quote jennywaaaaa-waaaaaa
i dont want to see your opinions i want a link or something with some facts .all i been reading in this thread is a bunch of christian hoopla .not all of us are christian and anyways half of this thread sounds like its straight out of Reefer Madness. its just ridiculous.

wow! This is a perfect example of how it effects your cognitive ability. The post above is exactly what she WROTE that she wants and none of it is from "christian" sites, yet it seems to have gotten lost in the smoke.
Jenny, see my post above your's. It is well-cited with links to non-christian research, which contain even MORE cites and links
Thanks, Jenny. There is nothing like a live demonstration to make a point. (profile states to the drug question >3 times a week, and under "dating interests" she has "smoking pot". Right on! Jen~ Ya think that you might be, shall we say "less than objective"?)
RE im(not)listening. 1974 study, huh? You have to go back 31 years, to find an incomplete study that MIGHT prove ONE (1) positive outcome from smoking pot?
And why hasn't that study been duplicated since? The studies are still ongoing but that one, if it ever actually existed, has never been replicated.
Choosing to hold onto that quality "evidence" in the face of hundreds of studies to the contrary is positively dogmatic to the point of appearing a faith-based belief. And you lecture long and loud about "cognition" issues....Right on to you too, Im (not)
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 19 (view)
Miraculous Messages from Water
Posted: 8/23/2005 1:47:18 AM
from the original post
Nearby ecotoxicologists speculated that the fish could have been trying to escape red tide, which regularly sweeps Florida's western beaches almost free of beachgoers, and leaves small dead fish on the shoreline. It also stinks and makes you cough.

"Red Tides" are created by microtoxic organisms, the organism themselves are not toxic, but they produce toxins that that indeed kill fish, cause neurological damage to marine mammals and humans, symptoms of respiratory illness, and muscle aches and pains.

Yep, they sure do. and red tides have been around forever, long before industrialized agriculture, and will probably be here after we're gone, barring nuclear events.
They are what are called "natural events" and what you're describing is a natural offshoot of said natural events.

Animal manure has been fingered as a cause of the chemical process that creates these harmful microtoxins. Read more at
Which describes neurotoxic illness in this scary manner.

Note the dishonest attempt to blame a natural event on man? Just because both red tides and chemical process both create the same natural microtoxins, evvviilll "man" is somehow at fault.

The fleeing fish and the dead marine mammals? 40 big ones the other day in Tampa; I can't remember now whether they were loggerheads or manatees, but they both weigh a thousand pounds, and are gentle and beautiful.

Translation "I was too stoned to know or care what died but whatever it was, it was big.....dude"
Loggerhead Sea Turtles: Reptiles.....Adult average size is 92 cm straight carapace length; average weight is 115 kg (360 lbs +/-)

Manatees: mamals.... Manatees are large marine mammals weighing up to 2000 pounds and reaching more than 12 feet in length.
?You'd think if they are so beautiful he'd know something about them....besides greenie dogma I mean; "gentle and beautiful" and would be concerned enough to find out what was actually dying.

They were manatees, and they died from the natural effects of the red tide, a natural event.
On March 5, 2005, biologists with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWC) Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) began responding to calls about dead manatees throughout southwest Florida, an area where red tide counts have been higher than normal for several months. As animal carcasses were recovered and necropsies (non-human autopsy) were conducted, it became more obvious that these animals might be dying as a result of exposure to red tide.

Staff members continue to recover carcasses and necropsy dead manatees. The table below provides information on manatees suspected to have died from red tide exposure. This information is based on preliminary reports; final verification is subject to laboratory work.

First fish kill in Florida suspected to have been caused by Red Tide occurs. Other outbreaks follow in 1854, 1856, 1865, 1878, 1879, 1880, 1882, 1883, 1885, 1908, 1916, and 1935. November 1946 - September 1947:
Resort beaches from Tarpon Springs to Marathon are covered with dead fish, reportedly at a rate of up to 100 pounds per foot of shoreline. Shortly after local officials go to Washington to seek federal help, the outbreak is routed by a Gulf hurricane. University of Miami researchers discover the micro-organism that is the cause of Red tide and name it Gymnodinium breve. It is still considered to be the most severe Florida Red Tide on record. June - December 1952:
Red Tide affects a 400 square mile area from Boca Grande to Sanibel Island; Clearwater Mayor Herbert Brown suggests using Air Force planes to fire-bomb a 150 mile area of dead fish with napalm to keep them from coming ashore.

Oh boy! Fresh fish!

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 18 (view)
Miraculous Messages from Water
Posted: 8/23/2005 1:25:49 AM

The over population of people in the world has caused the plants that are on earth to not be able keep up with the depletion of oxygen.

WOW! BRAVO!!!!!!!
such a delightful piece of greenie dogma!

"The changes we are measuring represent just a tiny fraction of the total
amount of oxygen in our air - 20.95 percent by volume. The oxygen
reduction is just 0.03 percent in the past 20 years and has no impact on
our breathing," Langenfelds. "Typical oxygen fluctuations indoors or in
city air would be far greater than this."

this comes to .0015% per year!
That means that in 666.66 years, we will have reduced the oxygen in the air by 1%, providing that nothing changes in 666.66 years. Of couse the increase in plant growth from the increase in CO2 wouldn't make any difference, huh? You get more changes than this on a single rainy or dusty day. Changes in relative humidity in a given day will also reduce the volume of oxygen in a given quantity of air by more than this 20 year amount.
I am all for conservation, but there are real things to worry about, like not getting cities blotted out by suitcase nukes in the hands of al qaeda. I can guarantee that said event will do more to harm the environment than me driving my old truck.
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 11 (view)
Newspeak, Doublethink and America.
Posted: 8/23/2005 1:11:02 AM
e.g. "homicide bomber" as opposed to the old "suicide bomber" The use of "homicide" puts an entirely different slant on any news story using said term.

You're correct. "suicide bomber" was a misnomer. They weren't out to kill themselves, they were out to killl others. A "suicide bomber' would go out away from people to kill himself because "suicide" is an inDUHvidual act. A homocide bomber surrounds himself with people to kill himself. He'd only be a "suicide bomber" if intercepted and appropriately gunned down or blown up before reaching his objective, i.e. a group of others whom he can kill.
Next one?

As for "Islamofascist" that's just pure Madison Avenue; to the extent that it's almost comical.

Yeaaahhh... ya gotta laugh at those guys flying airplanes into buildings, sawing the heads off or innocent people with a dull knife, raping & murdering groups of schoolkids in Beslan, shooting from schools, hospitals and "holy places" while screaming "allah AKHBAR" huh?
So now that you've glibly expressed your opinion, let analyze the words you chose. The first one is largely done.
HOMICIDE# noun: the killing of a human being by another human being
BOMBERnoun: a person who plants bombs
So a person who plants a bomb, on his person or elsewhere, to blow up others is NOT a "homicide bomber"?

ISLAMO/islamic adjective: of or relating to or supporting Islamism
FASCIST# noun: an adherent of fascism or other right-wing authoritarian views
FASCISM# noun: a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

Likewise, a person who is an adherant of islam and believes that the draconian islamic authoritarian hierarcy should control the behavior of ALL others or kill them, is somehow NOT an "islamofascist"?
Then what would you call him?
Anything else on which you need definitions?
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 111 (view)
Why is smoking pot a crime?
Posted: 8/23/2005 12:40:31 AM
OH! Thundermug.... you're HILARIOUS!!!!
That was humor, wasn't it?
Those of us who AREN'T potheads are the ignorant ones? Au contraire, my drug-addled friend. Read below, and weep.

OP wrote "and I made a shitload of money and retired at 37
yep, Drug dealing. It's not just a job, its an adventure"

RE: why is it illegal, I am amazed that all you whiz kids, allegdly in college (so far) and with all kinds of worldly experience at age 22, are sitting here spewing yer own opinions rather than checking facts.
Oh! that's right! You're from the left. You opinions TRUMP facts every time.
Here. A primer on wacky tobaccy:

Adverse Effects

Harm reduction has equally little appeal to those marijuana enthusiasts who naively believe that marijuana, alone of all drugs, is a perfectly harmless herb. This delusion is quickly refuted by a review of the medical literature, which reveals extensive evidence of possible adverse effects of marijuana. From a physiological standpoint, these effects are mostly mild or of marginal significance, such as temporarily elevated heartbeat, slight and subtle impacts on immune cells, alleged changes in endocrine functioning; disputed and marginal influences on newborns, and so forth. Of considerably more consequence are the alleged psychological effects, including increased risk of accidents, impaired school and job performance, amotivation, heightened risk of drug abuse and sundry other social pathologies. Nevertheless, from the standpoint of physical health, the single best established hazard of marijuana use appears to be an increased risk of lung disease from smoking.According to Dr. Lester Grinspoon, "After carefully monitoring the literature for more than two decades, we have concluded that the only well- confirmed deleterious physical effect of marihuana is harm to the pulmonary system."1 This should come as no surprise to any naive non-smoker who has exploded in a paroxysm of coughing after inhaling his or her first toke of marijuana.
In the meantime, an important, unsettled concern is that of lung cancer. Despite the fact that epidemiosmoking increases the risk of cancer, especially in the throat and upper respiratory tract.6 To begin with, the tars from marijuana contain most of the same carcinogens as tobacco, to a greater or lesser extent.7 It has been argued that marijuana is even more carcinogenic than tobacco because it contains some 50% more of the highly potent carcinogens known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, by-products of incomplete combustion which are thought to be a prime culprit in lung cancer. In reply, hempsters contend that tobacco is more dangerous because it contains far more radioactive carcinogens, particularly polonium-210.8 However, this point seems moot in the light of experiments by the Leuchtenbergers and others, showing that marijuana tars, like those of tobacco, produce carcinogenic changes when applied to both animal and human lung tissue cultures.

Ok, worse for you than ciggies. What else?sssuuucckkkkkkkkkkk...

Effects of Marijuana on the Brain.
Researchers have found that THC changes the way in which sensory information gets into and is acted on by the hippocampus. This is a component of the brain's limbic system that is crucial for learning, memory, and the integration of sensory experiences with emotions and motivations. Investigations have shown that THC suppresses neurons in the information-processing system of the hippocampus. In addition, researchers have discovered that learned behaviors, which depend on the hippocampus, also deteriorate.

OK so it makes you like the OP's in here who can't find these facts. What else? ssuuuuuucckkkkk

Effects of Heavy Marijuana Use on Learning and Social Behavior. A study of college students has shown that critical skills related to attention, memory, and learning are impaired among people who use marijuana heavily, even after discontinuing its use for at least 24 hours. Researchers compared 65 "heavy users," who had smoked marijuana a median of 29 of the past 30 days, and 64 "light users," who had smoked a median of 1 of the past 30 days. After a closely monitored 19- to 24-hour period of abstinence from marijuana and other illicit drugs and alcohol, the undergraduates were given several standard tests measuring aspects of attention, memory, and learning. Compared to the light users, heavy marijuana users made more errors and had more difficulty sustaining attention, shifting attention to meet the demands of changes in the environment, and in registering, processing, and using information. The findings suggest that the greater impairment among heavy users is likely due to an alteration of brain activity produced by marijuana.

Longitudinal research on marijuana use among young people below college age indicates those who used have lower achievement than the non-users, more acceptance of deviant behavior, more delinquent behavior and aggression, greater rebelliousness, poorer relationships with parents, and more associations with delinquent and drug-using friends..... Last year, Fried and his team published early findings showing a drop in IQ scores among the adolescents in the sample who used marijuana. And because the sample group had been monitored since birth, Fried had extraordinary data on which to rely. When the IQ scores were compared to those collected prior to marijuana use, the cannabis smokers were the only group to show a decline. Significantly, the IQ scores returned to previous levels in adolescents who gave up smoking marijuana.

OK so you become an anti-social dullard, and? suuuuuccckkkk....

Effects of Marijuana on Heart Rate and Blood Pressure

Recent findings indicate that smoking marijuana while shooting up cocaine has the potential to cause severe increases in heart rate and blood pressure. In one study, experienced marijuana and cocaine users were given marijuana alone, cocaine alone, and then a combination of both. Each drug alone produced cardiovascular effects; when they were combined, the effects were greater and lasted longer. The heart rate of the subjects in the study increased 29 beats per minute with marijuana alone and 32 beats per minute with cocaine alone. When the drugs were given together, the heart rate increased by 49 beats per minute, and the increased rate persisted for a longer time. The drugs were given with the subjects sitting quietly. In normal circumstances, an individual may smoke marijuana and inject cocaine and then do something physically stressful that may significantly increase the risk of overloading the cardiovascular system.

Ok, so now we're anti-social dullards with respiratory problems risking heart attacks, so what is wrong with that.....dude? suuuucckkk..sucksuck suck

Chromosomal Damage
A significant increase (3.4 versus 1.2%) of chromosomal abnormalities was reported in marijuana users as compared to nonusers .

Effects of Marijuana on Pregnancy

Any drug of abuse can affect a mother's health during pregnancy, making it a time when expectant mothers should take special care of themselves. Drugs of abuse may interfere with proper nutrition and rest, which can affect good functioning of the immune system. Some studies have found that babies born to mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy were smaller than those born to mothers who did not use the drug. In general, smaller babies are more likely to develop health problems.

A nursing mother who uses marijuana passes some of the THC to the baby in her breast milk. Research indicates that the use of marijuana by a mother during the first month of breast-feeding can impair the infant's motor development (control of muscle movement).
....The infants of mothers who smoked the drug during pregnancy appeared to be affected by delayed auditory response, and later, delayed language development.

So my 3-eyed deaf baby with a tail is a stoner too and a little slow....dude. I that such a BAD thing?

Addictive Potential of Marijuana

A drug is addicting if it causes compulsive, often uncontrollable drug craving, seeking, and use, even in the face of negative health and social consequences. Marijuana meets this criterion. More than 120,000 people enter treatment per year for their primary marijuana addiction. In addition, animal studies suggest marijuana causes physical dependence, and some people report withdrawal symptoms

Hey,dude. I'm not addicted. I can stop any time I want suuuuccckkkkkk...suck suck....
What was the question?

Effects of Heavy Marijuana Use on Learning and Social Behavior
Depression(19), anxiety(20), and personality disturbances(21) have been associated with marijuana use. Research clearly demonstrates that marijuana has potential to cause problems in daily life or make a person’s existing problems worse. Because marijuana compromises the ability to learn and remember information, the more a person uses marijuana the more he or she is likely to fall behind in accumulating intellectual, job, or social skills. Moreover, research has shown that marijuana’s adverse impact on memory and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off.

Students who smoke marijuana get lower grades and are less likely to graduate from high school, compared with their non-smoking peers...

Ok,so I flunk or drop out; out of life and school and have to support my 3-eyed, deaf baby with a tail by selling dope. Who cares? I can retire at 37 and wear a speedo..well if I don't get caught suuccckkkkkkkkkkkk I have my smoking buddies still suuuuccckkkk
But I won;t get caught because I drive better when I'm stoned.....dude......

A recently completed study compared the effects of smoking a marijuana cigarette with or without alcohol, alcohol alone, and placebos for each drug. Actual driving was done over a course rigged with various traffic problems. Both drugs produced impairment of driving performance, the combination being worse than either alone.

Effect on driving
...Fifty-nine subjects smoked marijuana cigarettes until "high" and then were periodically tested by highway patrol officers on the roadside sobriety test.
Overall, 94% of the subjects failed to pass the test 90 min after smoking and 60% after 150 min, despite the fact that by then plasma concentrations of THC were rather low (81). It appeared that establishing a clear relation between THC plasma concentrations and the degree of clinical impairment will be much more difficult than has been found in the case of alcohol (140). The exact prevalence of persons who might be picked up while driving under the influence of marijuana is uncertain. One survey found at least 5 ng of THC per ml in blood specimens of 14.4% of a random sample of 1792 drivers detained for erratic driving. Many were associated with blood levels of alcohol as well

Any other questions from the classless class?

More info: (for those not too stoned to read it)
(EXCELLENT site here)
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 9 (view)
Newspeak, Doublethink and America.
Posted: 8/22/2005 11:54:02 PM
Frankly, I'm disturbed at the amount of Newspeak and Doublethink that gets thrown around these days. For example;

Geo-political landscape
Homicide bomber...

What part of those simple, clear-language terms are beyond your mental faculties?
What terms would you use in lieu of same?

Bush is more fascist... kidnapping democratically elected leaders of a nation (like Haiti) and sending thousands of M-16's to support a coup by a textile magnate...

And you are under the impression that the people in Haiti were better of BEFORE Aristide was shown the door?

4. CIA Knew Aristide Was Mad

Once again, the major media won't report on some recent history that sheds enormous light on the current situation with Haiti and the country's deposed president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

The blame for the Aristide mess is being placed at the doorstep of the Bush White House.

But the Haiti problem, like so many of George Bush's troubles, finds its origin in the previous administration.

When a senior CIA officer reported in 1993 that Aristide was mad, the White House asked CIA chief James Woolsey to fire the analyst who gave the briefing. Woolsey refused, but we hear that the CIA analyst was exiled to the CIA Center for the Study of Intelligence, where he remained until he retired a few years ago.

Inside sources say CIA officers stood by the agency's assessment of Aristide, but meanwhile the Clinton administration restored Aristide to power.

A report by the Center for Security Policy's Frank Gaffney noted during the Clinton years: "U.S. Intelligence believes Aristide to be a clinical psychotic, an individual who is sufficiently mentally unstable as to require medication and institutional treatment for depression and megalomania. The center has learned, moreover, that he is addicted to the drugs that stabilize his condition."

At the very least, Aristide's established record of anti-democratic behavior should have given the Clinton administration pause.

CBS news reported that during the brief period when Aristide was president of Haiti he encouraged the "necklacing" of his political opponents, the practice of lighting gasoline-laden tires placed around the victim's neck. Aristide said of necklacing: "What a beautiful tool, what a beautiful instrument, what a beautiful device, it's beautiful, yes, it's beautiful, it's cute, it's pretty, it has a good smell. Wherever you go you want to inhale it."

And the New York Times has ignored Wall Street Journal reports that Aristide's government has been heavily involved with drug traffickers.

Other evidence suggests that Aristide had bought off key Democratic Party operatives.

A Times report from 1995 states, "The agency {CIA} denies it had its own policy agenda at the time or that it was trying to subvert Administration policy. But the whole episode should lead to some searching questions as the CIA struggles to refashion itself. The CIA has no obligation to produce intelligence reports that hew to Administration views, but is obliged not to obstruct the execution of American foreign policy."

And where is your proof that the US had ANYTHING to do with it?

For all you know, it could have been the Froggies who removed him:

Aristide Loses Support of French

Stewart Stogel
Thursday, Feb. 26, 2004

New York -- Embattled Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide received a blow to his survival when the French government told him on Tuesday that it no longer supported him and would now back a government of national unity without his participation.

Support from Paris had been seen as critical to Aristide's survival.

Aristide, whose term as Haitian president has two years to run, has insisted he will not resign. He has called the rebel opposition no more than "terrorists."

A senior official at the French foreign ministry told NewsMax that any move to preserve Arisitde's embattled presidency is now over:
"He does not have our support, we will now move to support a government of national unity,"

But, without the demoncraps, Aristide-the-mad-dog wouldn't have even been in power in the FIRST place:

In 1990, Jean-Bertrand Aristide became the county's first elected president. A year later, Arisitide is overthrown in a coup by a military-junta.
The embattled president then takes up exile in the United States where, with the help of the Clinton administration, he plans his eventual return.
....while in Haiti, the world body sends in a "human rights observer mission" to document "torture and execution of pro-Aristide civilians, in order to pressure General Cedras (the coup leader) from power."
In Haiti, it is a roller-coaster ride, culminating in a massive U.S. military invasion (1994), which returned Aristide to power at gun point...

This would be your buddy, Billzebubba
This sounds more like fascism than removing from office a madman who murders his own citizen through such delightful acts as "necklacing".
And we won't even discuss the "facisist" aspect ofa leader who would do that to his own people, will we?

Now, on to your next topic: "fascist"
Can you even define the word? Apparently not.
FASCISM: # noun: a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government
hmmmmmm....sounds like Aristide, to me
......Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life. The definitional debates and arguments by academics over the nature of fascism, however, fill entire bookshelves. There are clearly elements of both left and right ideology in the development of Fascism.
In the Libertarian view, fascism is defined by keeping the ownership of property private (unlike what the communists want), but regulating the use of that private property by the state and limiting the ability of the owners to decide what they want to do with their property.

Sounds like the current leftist US supremes, The democratic party, the (leftist) EPA, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace (or any other greenie organization)...etc.
I don't see many bushbots lining up for any of this stuff, nor have I seen el presidente' bOoSh putting any mad, murderous puppets into power as was done by the billy 'n hilly show, in Haiti, in the Balkans, etc.

Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 6 (view)
Uh huh?
Posted: 8/22/2005 11:21:00 PM
To illustrate Jax point:

Churches burn, U.N. watches
Jihadists persecute Christian minority in Kosovo

Posted: August 23, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2005
Jihadists continue their campaign of burning churches and persecuting Christians in Kosovo, the land "liberated" by U.S. and NATO forces in the 1990s, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
While German and French peacekeepers watch the religious atrocities, Italian and U.S. soldiers have put their lives on the line to defend the Christian minority...
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 5 (view)
Uh huh?
Posted: 8/22/2005 11:11:33 PM
msquared, that's because you're ignorant of your topic. It is "Thou Shall not MURDER" there's a world of difference.
Further, if you and the other mouth-breathers had read the website, you'd realize there is nothing in there about killing people to promote God. It is a group that ministers to and from the military.
What pathetic little creatures you folks are....
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 83 (view)
How can guys turn there feelings on and off so easily?!
Posted: 8/22/2005 10:45:14 PM
Ya think it might have something to do with your focus on "cute", "rich" or "bad boys"?
Huh? Huh? Huh?
Ya get what ya deserve when you target superficial qualifications over character:
Whaaa???? You get "superficial".
And with the "bad boy" thing, does anything REEEALLLLLY need to be said or is it self-explanatory?
Show ALL Forums