Flame War! Wikipedia defines flaming as: "The motive for flaming is often not dialectic, but rather social or psychological. Sometimes, flamers are attempting to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority.?" And so it is. On the other hand, we at GM's Corner are not about to let challenges go unanswered because to do so merely encourages the scoundrels (
... ed...
... GM)
Yes, by all means let's talk about Mark A. York's qualifications. First, he is as narcissistic as John "Do you know who I am?" Kerry. Mark brags about "endangered fisheries." This of course he means to imply that he is fighting to save, as he once published in the "DailySundial" wild salmon. But fisheries is defined as:
Hah, this guy has a bachelors degree in journalism Not biology, if he has any biology at all, it is as a minor and that requirement is only 18 hours. Furthermore, according to his book, he was a GS-4 Technician.... The lowest of the low, the least qualified of the qualified, so low that a degreed person with NO experience was placed over him in his sojourn to the ANWR and that his work was seasonal. Oh, and his lifetime of environmental work... hmmm, according to his own words (he published this remember): he spent 17 years as a construction worker going from "the kid who always got beat up to the terminator." as he protected the others in his fisheries crew from having to deal with the "tough" oil field hands.
Oh, by the way, that's from his book "Against A Strong Current and you can find an excerpt here:
. Interesting book by all accounts...
Actually, this book is sent to an electronic publisher, not accepted for mass publication by an â€Å“accepted publisherâ€ÂÂ�, but printed on order by
a vanity type press and he rails against Woody and me for unsourced material but where we weren’t being humorous, we sourced just fine. Oh, and by the way, Mark has a screed against the vanity press here:
which when you read it is hilarious; this guy has more bathos than the Marx Brothers. But I digress, here is a "review" of York's Against A Strong Current:
. Lion's and Tigers and Bears Oh My!!
That review is a little over the top and I have absolutely no doubt that York himself wrote it using a fake ID for the purpose. However there are two other reviews which kind of put York in his place:
Atta boy York, slammed twice for your hubris. However, our intrepid enviro-warrior doesn't quit, I'll give him that. Take a look at the sites he has been banned at beginning with mine (yet, he continues to come around). Also
. He claimed to be a "pen pal of sorts" with
. Lastly, and then I'll quit because I really hate having a battle of wits with York when it is so obvious that he is half armed; York was banned from my blog for the use of foul language. He claims he didn't use anything stronger than "ass" and, unfortunately I deleted all the really vile language and York knows it. Unfortnately for York, the net is full of his postings and he typically and usually gets frustrated (low frustration tolerance is a hallmark of lefty trolls) and posts something like this
with all those misspellings this guy purports to have a degree in journalism? "Ass" indeed!
Which brings us to Randy Paul’s entry in the flame wars. Paul advertises his blog as â€Å“A Proud Member Of The Reality Based Community.â€ÂÂ� Oh my! He congratulates York here:
Paul goes on to say â€Å“here’s a little something about their sourceâ€ÂÂ� and references a coal baron (one would assume) by the name of S. Fred Singer. Only one problem Paul, I didn’t reference Singer in a realistic post or any other post that I could find so I have no idea where you came up with it. And your reference of York’s post was in reference to my post. Paul, you really need to get a real life. Further, if you were really going to debunk the articles I posted on, then by all means do so, but be sure to cite your sources, not your fevered imagination.
OK, let’s go on to Paul’s qualifications in this little bit of byte-drama. Paul has a … are you ready… degree in F….I….L….M! There you have it boys and girls. A degree in film and a good deal of knowledge about south and central America. That’s it. OK, not quite it. In his next sentence he â€Å“provesâ€ÂÂ� that Woody is all wet regarding the cost of removing CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels with that paragon of scientific journals (you know, the one that York always champions) THE … again… ready… here it comes…. a
…. Well, I’m sure castigated. Gawrsh as Goofy would say!
Well, the editorial does in fact say that removing CO2 would only be â€Å“$1.00 per tonâ€ÂÂ� Only one problem, and that is the number of tons produced worldwide in a ten year period from 1994 through 2003 (and we are using those figures because that is what we will have to pay over the next 10 years if we start on Jan. 1, 2006… let’s see… it’s about
at one dollar per ton (and remember, a metric tonne weighs 2, 200 pounds whereas a ton weighs only 2000 pounds, so a metric ton is about 10% larger. Having said that, and even converting metric tones to standard tons we are talking about $512,081,559,000.00 we are talking about 512 billion dollars; you don't think you will feel that in your pocketbook?. Oh, and Paul, York,
is from YOUR guys… the ones that you say BELIEVE in GW.
Paul’s parting comment is â€Å“If you can't get the truth behind them they just make things up.â€ÂÂ� Paul, I propose that reducing the cost to only one ton and hiding the total number of tons is making things up.
But you see, radical out in left field lefties like Paul and Mark are all about that; scare, fear mongering and popular pablum; about purporting theory as fact (actually, to the amusement of all and sundry, that fellow York actually said "A theory in science is indeed fact." I'm surprised he graduated with that kind of thinking... all of my professors would have flunked me if I held that view. Then again, I went to a real university. and have more than 60 graduate hours with a 3.75 GPA, I'm a member of a national honor society as well. York on the other hand, maintained that grades of well,
) and their proposed solutions are the only hope of mankind. Well, remember global winter, the next ice age, how silicone implants caused all kinds of medical problems, how electric transmission lines caused cancer and other dire threats from magnetic currents (which is all the rage now, wearing magnets that is), how cell phones would give you brain tumors in a relatively short time… all debunked, but all part of the fear mongering and the cost of finding out that it was fear mongering was staggering. Dow Corning went bankrupt
spent over 3 billion dollars for the privilege, we spent well over 25 billion on powerline research, money that could have helped an awful lot of kids who were hungry, or a lot of treatment for aids victims in Africa or even on honest climate research. Reality based community indeed.
Update: Some of my readers have gone to leave comments at York's site. He banned them! Bwahahahaha!!! Oh Mark, you are such a dweeb!
1
Bravo! As usual very selective quoting, which is a wingnut staple. No, make that "neccessity." When you lie, well, what is left out is key. You know Rope- a- dope our qualifications are immaterial to our sources: journalism 101.
Randy's and mine are solid. Yours on the other hand are biased wingerville paid for shills by naysaying industry lobbyists. How pathetic.
The colateral field I have is in Environmental Biology and the 18 unit speculation is actually 85. it's on my transcript. I'm a GS-5 professional series fishery biologist just finished a stint with the BLM. Look it up. Right wing Idaho hired me. I guess you have no influence there huh Roper?
What you've composed here is called an ad hominem circumstantial. Well it failed, because of context and truth. You had little of either. Just the grain of truth necessary for your diatribe. Keep running coward. That's your style.
Those reviews, hardly literary legends. Amateurs like you two.
Posted by: Mark York at Saturday, November 12 2005 04:32 PM (pPRtn)
2
And one final thing you lying sack of fertilizer. You deleted nothing from me stronger than the word "Ass." This inference you keep making that I cussed you out and violated your pious virgin ears is a bald faced lie.
Posted by: Mark York at Saturday, November 12 2005 04:41 PM (pPRtn)
3
York, you have turned on moderation and effectively banned a number of my friends who went to your blog to leave comments. Yet, you feel free to come here and say anything you want, without a single backup by way of argument other than pointing to realclimate. I'm sure, when those folk see you for your behavior, they will ban you too. as for your "ad hominim circumstantial" (which I noticed you misused at XLRQ also) please note this: Ad hominem circumstantial involves pointing out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position. Essentially, circumstantial ad hominem constitutes an attack on the bias of a person. The reason that this is fallacious is that it simply does not make one's opponent's arguments, from a logical point of view, any less credible to point out that one's opponent is disposed to argue that way. Such arguments are not necessarily irrational, but are not correct in strict logic. This illustrates one of the differences between rationality and logic. I'm not arguing that you are a GW proponent because of your bias, I'm arguing that you haven't got a clue, can't argue effectively and fall back on threats (wanna get a hold of my neck little boy?) vile language (I've settled that one as far as I can see... sack of fertilizer indeed!). If you can come up with some cogent reasons for believing in GW, back it up with research that you have found on your own rather than babble using the folk at Realclimate, I'd be happy to listen to you. Until then, go away. Go far away.
Posted by: GM at Saturday, November 12 2005 05:26 PM (0CqNu)
4
York --
Only a coward deletes non-profane, qualified comments because he disagrees with their content.
You are just like the rest of the pathetic, whiny little communist losers of the left, you feel it's okay to bray your trollish, anemically reasoned comments(hell, every point you make to try to justify the ignorance behind your alleged beliefs is anemic) at other blogs, but the minute anyone disagrees with you at your own blog, you delete their comments.
You, sir, are an inconsequential organism of a calibre well beneath plankton.
Posted by: Seth at Saturday, November 12 2005 05:31 PM (XmPs/)
5
GM&Woody, is that a threat that marky-warky-puddin-head posted somewhere? The bit where he says he would get his hands around someone's throat?
Wow. He should be more careful than to post threats online....especially when a simple google search shows where his dumbass lives in Sunland, Ca.
You know what? I am only about half an hour away from Sunland. In fact, I have friends that live there in Sunland, and a nice drive over to visit my friends would be a great way to spend a day.
Mayeb I should stop by Mark's and bring him a nice Hallmark Greeting card to celebrate the upcoming season of peace and forgiveness eh?
After all, isn't part of the reason for the season to remember the lessons that Jesus taught? And Jesus did teach us to turn the other cheek.
Mark? Buddy? Wanna get together for some coffee? Oh wait....HOT drinks might contribute to global warming.
How about some ice tea?
Dammit. Not only does making ice cause global warming, but if we selfishly use that ice we take away it's ability to counter some of that global warming.
Mark? Wanna meet for a room temperature glass of some environmentallly friendly liquid refreshment?
Posted by: kender at Saturday, November 12 2005 07:50 PM (Ekg2f)
6
Now, guys, be nice. Nobody else will play with the pathetic little creature, so he's got to come here to display his ignorance. He's got nowhere else to go, poor thing.
My suggestion would to be to toss it a scrap occasionally for entertainment value, but to otherwise ignore it and leave it to wallow in its irrelevance.
But then, of course, this isn't the sort of... creature... I would allow in my house, either. I'd keep it chained up outside, so it wouldn't soil the carpet.
-- R'cat
CatHouse Chat
Posted by: Romeocat at Sunday, November 13 2005 12:29 AM (uS/wq)
7
Some things never change.
In elementary school when someone yelled "FIGHT!", nearly everyone dropped what they were doing and ran to watch. I must admit to having retained a certain unwholesome interest in confrontations - although my interest has migrated from fisticuffs to verbal pugilism (how sophisticated, eh?).
I am especially pleased to see that my guy is winning - BIG.
Posted by: too many steves at Sunday, November 13 2005 01:06 AM (0QaNZ)
8
York: "You know Rope- a- dope our qualifications are immaterial to our sources: journalism 101.
Randy's and mine are solid. Yours on the other hand are biased wingerville paid for shills by naysaying industry lobbyists. How pathetic."
Lets parse this bon mot for it's meaning. First York says qualifications are immaterial to his sources and that is (apparantly) from journalism 101. Then, he contradicts himself and says his are solid while mine are biased and paid for in wingerville.
Is York saying his credentials are solid or his sources are solid? If it's his sources, he is only producing sources material of THEORY stating that some of the information are facts and that is true, there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for example(it has gone up from 270 ppm to 370 ppm a tiny, tiny almost infitesimal amount but that is the subject of another post) on the other hand, it is the EFFECT that we are talking about and that, on his part, is speculative theory and while it may be proven eventually (though all inidcations are that it won't) it is still theory. If he is saying his credentials are solid.. well, he did graduate from CSUN....
Posted by: GM at Sunday, November 13 2005 01:23 AM (0CqNu)
9
"York: "You know Rope- a- dope our qualifications are immaterial to our sources: journalism 101."
Ah, so that explains why you couldnt distinguish between theory and fact. You "education" is in journalism. I guess my previous point was indeed correct that "Mark York was never taught scientific principles, or was asleep the day the subject was taught"
Posted by: M Harn at Sunday, November 13 2005 03:45 AM (RrRlp)
10
Is that a theat Kender? Because I've saved it for future reference. If you can't handle opposing arguments then go back to the cave, no one's forcing you to read my posts.
As for rejecting mine and Randy's evidence I'd say you have to. Realclimate; NASA; Union of Conmcerned scientists and a host of others say you are wrong. Flat-out wrong. So what do you do? Discredit the source. Well that doesn't fly on merit. They aren't biased, they're real. Here's the real kicker: your sources are. They're paid for shills and we've documented that FACT. Ignore if you must.
Deriding a my resume is the last refuge of a scoundrel just like your faux patriotism, and is indeed an ad hominem circumstantial. It says I have a vanity press book so I couldn't know anything, yet I work for the Bush administration in science-- environmental science. How could this be? I'm not going to continually refute the same fallacies over and over with people claiming I'm biased, or visitors calling me an idiot for being valid.
Saying you feel like ringing someone's neck is different than claiming to come to their house for an unfriendly visit. Remember that because the LAPD will be very interested should that happen.
Do yourself a favor: call off the hounds.
Posted by: Mark York at Sunday, November 13 2005 04:36 AM (b8f4k)
11
No puddin' head, that wasn't a threat. The line you wrote about breaking someone's neck is a threat.
Ididn't say anything about your sources. I amteasing you about the whole GW thing. As for your credentials? Yes, you have credentials. Whether they are valid in the GW arena is another matter entirely. CSUN is such a prestigiuous school.
BTW, I have been reading excerpts from your "books", and I must say, my GF is an editor and here is her opinion: You need an editor, a better story, some writing skills and a subject matter that people will care enough to read about".
I notice that you keep dissent off of your site. That's fine. I tried to be civil over there, but you would have none of it. For a man that averages about 40 hits a day one would think that any visitors you would have stop by would be treated with some amount of hospitality.
Let me tell you. You are a sad little man, with a big bulbous head and a receding hairline, but that is a good thing, as it will give you a more aerodynamic outline and make trudging through the hills in search of endangered fish easier, because twigs wont get stuck in the hair on your big bulbous head.
Face it puddin head. Your "books" suck, your "blog" sucks, your "career" sucks and YOU suck. You are living a sad little life, wailing against the big bad BusHalliburton machine, never realizing that the policies you wish for would destroy your country and your way of life.
Now, I never said I was coming over for an unfriendly visit. In fact, I said I was gonna bring you a hallmark card, and maybe go out for some coffee.....but nooooooo. Your paranoid delusions make everything out to be a threat.
Call the LAPD Mark....now that they have solved all crime in LA I am sure they will be happy to rush right over and handle yoru paranoid delusions....maybe they will get you a room and some meds.
Last note. We aren't the hounds puddin head. If anything, we are the attack dawgs.
Posted by: kender at Sunday, November 13 2005 05:07 AM (Ekg2f)
12
"a better story, some writing skills and a subject matter that people will care enough to read about"."
Well that settles it. Your girl friend, as everyone surely knows, at least in some circles, is the final literary authority. Whatever. Amateurs amateurs amateurs. My sources as any journalist and scientist will verify are impeccable, as is my hairline, so this sort of thing is just a sad ad hominen. Pardon me if I don't interpret your Hallmark as friendly.
And from what I can tell all of your blogs suck, you're a movie grunt, not that there's anything wrong with that, I'm a SAG member myself, and are an unusually combative ideologue. Nothing unique about that. Stay home.
Like GM says of me, you came and insulted me with foul language right off. That's a bad start, so say goodnight, this party's over.
Posted by: Mark York at Sunday, November 13 2005 06:07 AM (b8f4k)
13
I think York is a hoot. He ot only is incapable of rational argument, check this out: On his blog I state his name as Yorky and castigate him for "banning" people when he gripes about being banned so often. In the very next comment York starts off with "Use my real name you friggin snake."
Up above however, he doesn't call me Roper or GM or GM Roper, he calls me a "And one final thing you lying sack of fertilizer." In a prior comment, he calls me "Rope-a-dope..." and that doesn't even include his "friggin snake" comment.
In the real world, as opposed to the one inhabited by York, we call that hypocracy. York, can you say HY-PO-CRITE?
Posted by: gmroper at Sunday, November 13 2005 07:08 AM (0CqNu)
14
Having said that, and even converting metric tones to standard tons we are talking about $512,081,559,000.00 we are talking about 512 billion dollars; you don't think you will feel that in your pocketbook?. Oh, and Paul, York, that figure is from YOUR guys… the ones that you say BELIEVE in GW.
Amortized over the course of ten years it's not that much. It's $1,828 per per person based on a population of 280,000,000 over the course of ten years totaling $15 per person.
Posted by: Randy Paul at Sunday, November 13 2005 08:58 AM (A8nwv)
15
That's $15 per person
per month for ten years.
Posted by: Randy Paul at Sunday, November 13 2005 09:11 AM (A8nwv)
16
Thank you GM for trolling these boobs so skillfully. It is amusing to watch.
Please please tell me they are not registered Democrats.
Posted by: The Ugly American at Sunday, November 13 2005 12:27 PM (+8Kwg)
17
They should start a band:
"Paul-York and the Bolsheviks"
Posted by: Seth at Sunday, November 13 2005 03:23 PM (XmPs/)
18
Actually puddin head, my GF is a fine editor, and my prose bugs her to death, but I won't let her touch it, as it then loses my flavor.
As for movie grunt? Yeah...hhmm...I was listed as a grip once....other than that it has been horse wrangler, stunt coordinator and associate producer....but only because I secured the costuming, extra's, location, props, set painters, SFX guys and played go between with the crew and location owners. I only was given grip because I helped load the truck when we wrapped.
Your credentials as a scientist SUCK MELONHEAD!!!! CSUN SUCKS....I have known too many lib dolts that have gone there, and still do, as I live about 3 miles from that sucky assed campus.
Your "credentials" as a "journalist", not to mention a "writer" are even worse, and your book, (the excerpt I read, I wouldn't buy it to wipe my a-- with) was the most boring thing I have read since I found directions on using laquer and was bored enough to read them. At least the directions were written by a PROFESSIONAL!!!
I didn't start out insulting you, melon head, but now that I have started, you gutter-slug, it is kinda' fun. I know that you will read this, and won't allow comments at your blog, so I wont leave you unkind words there, Quark, but I will leave them here, knowing that I am pissing you off.
How do you see through those beady little eyes anyway? Is there any chance that you will go back to alaska to chain yourself to a bull dozer when they start to rip up anwr? Boy, I bet you just cry in your granola over that don't ya nature boy?
All those caribou out there wailing in the cold north wind while big effin machines tear up the earth. I hear caribou is good eating. Maybe I should call my congressman and have 'em toss in a rider so the oil workers can get special dispensation to go hunting on their off time eh?
OKokokok.......I'm done....for the moment anyway puddin head. Well, almost done.
Have you considered renting out that enormous cranium for a billboard? You could probably fit two or maybe three ads on your forehead alone.
OK....now, I'm done.
But if you do rent out that giant scully your totin around, I want ten percent for giving you the idea. For twenty percent I'll even secure the ads.
Oh...alomst forgot. You get a pitiful 40 hits a day....you should be thanking GM and Woody for bringing you traffic. I have never seen a site with so few hits actually put up google ads.......you may as well beg at that point.
Posted by: kender at Sunday, November 13 2005 07:02 PM (Ekg2f)
19
York isn't worth the time to read -- too few ideas or proposals.
I suggest you note that in the future -- though no future mentions may be best.
I believe in CO2 increases; a gas tax should be instituted to stabilize the prices, and the price increases, and encourage different behavior. The first 10 cents/gal should go for Katrina/ Wilma/ Fed disaster relief/ recovery.
Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at Monday, November 14 2005 12:51 AM (6gu8Z)
20
Am I a liar or is Randy Paul a psycho?
Randy Paul wrote in response to "...I once had a short science show on educational television.: "One wonders why someone would 'never reveal' such a relevant fact or make the claim without supplying anything in the way of proof."
Posted by: Woody at Monday, November 14 2005 04:11 AM (t7ur8)
21
Time for Cooler Heads
As I went through this thread, I realized that Civil Truth was staying out of the fray and, thereby, showing good sense. As I went futher into the Global Warming entry two down, I noted Civil Truth's comments about bringing some civility (appropriately) back to the discussions. He wrote, "The Golden Rule is still a good law to follow." While I'm speaking for myself, I agree with that and with him, and I suspect that G.M. agrees, also.
We didn't start the attacks. We were attacked ourselves, in fact blindsided. and defended ourselves rather than let untruths go unanwered. Calling me a liar doesn't prove global warming claims by the left. In light of that and other false claims, I don't consider our responses to this point inappropriate.
I genuinely appreciate everyone who came to the defense of G.M. and myself and who exposed the other side and their weak arguments. Your support is heart warming. Also, I realize that some of the arguing was in good fun, even if some of it was not. In any event, now that the points have been made, it may be time to move along to more constructive commentaries.
However, this doesn't preclude us from discussing the merits for or against global warming--and that ought to continue as part of our learning process.
I don't expect Randy Paul or Mark York to agree to be civil, maybe they will; but, we can rise above them and not let them drag us further into their mire--and, possibly, just possibly, we can pull them up, too.
It's been interesting and enlightening, and maybe a little humorous, but I'm going to try to follow the advice that Civil Truth offered. It is not only right, but will certainly make for more educational and interesting reading.
Thanks again to everyone for supporting us and for being part of our cyber-family.
Posted by: Woody at Monday, November 14 2005 04:59 AM (t7ur8)
22
You should see Al Gores latest rant about global warming as being worse than terrorism.
Posted by: rick at Monday, November 14 2005 10:20 AM (FQZYp)
Posted by: G M Roper at Monday, November 14 2005 10:59 AM (uL3la)
24
2nd test with security code only
Posted by: G M Roper at Monday, November 14 2005 11:01 AM (uL3la)
25
test with security code and authentication via type key
Hey, is this some kind of coded spam?
W
Posted by: G M Roper at Monday, November 14 2005 11:04 AM (uL3la)
26
You know Woody, you got me to thinking.
I enjoy argument for argument's sake, in some ways similar to how some people enjoy playing cards. I don't take it personally, even when I feel that I've lost the argument. My life doesn't depend on winning and losing, and the topic isn't usually materially affected by the outcome of the argument. In sum, arguing is fun and intellectually stimulating.
Which is to say that I feel some pity toward those whose sense of self worth and life purpose (apparently) is determined by their opinions and positons on the issues of the day.
How else would you interpret the illogical, vitriolic, and profane rantings of these folk?
Posted by: too many steves at Monday, November 14 2005 01:43 PM (0QaNZ)
27
Too many steves, you made me think about why we do this. I, too, enjoy the intellectual stimulation of taking different sides of issues and discussing them. As is the case here, it's unlikely that minds are changed, but occasionally I will learn something different and modify my views, which is another benefit.
However, like the card game analogy that you offered, some people take it too seriously and throw their cards, accuse the other side of cheating, and turn over the card table. This isn't important enough to do that and it discourages the learning process. In school, the kids who disrupted the class got sent to the principal's office. You would have hoped that everyone would have grown above that.
I quit visiting some sites because they were contentious. We never want anyone to stop visiting here for that reason. All sides are welcome and encouraged to comment. All we ask is civility in the exchanges.
Posted by: Woody at Tuesday, November 15 2005 02:34 AM (t7ur8)
28
graffiti name generator
photos of niki catsouras
gruesome accident photos
delicious from flavor of love pictures
Posted by: Arnie at Wednesday, December 24 2008 02:44 PM (lMvRY)
29
rebel confederate myspace layouts
photos of stacy johnson klein
Posted by: Dominic at Wednesday, December 24 2008 10:36 PM (lMvRY)
30
line flyer with eraser
inuyasha love stories
edible arrangements promotions
joga tv ronaldinho
Posted by: Heel at Friday, December 26 2008 05:57 PM (lMvRY)
31
Posted by: Halo at Saturday, January 10 2009 04:06 PM (bqTlE)
32
Posted by: Diesel at Saturday, January 10 2009 06:58 PM (bqTlE)
33
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
. .
Posted by: Jane at Sunday, February 08 2009 10:32 PM (6SjIv)
34
Posted by: Kir at Friday, February 13 2009 04:59 PM (b/xwd)
35
Posted by: Hero at Friday, February 13 2009 09:04 PM (b/xwd)
36
Posted by: Kir at Saturday, February 14 2009 03:05 PM (b/xwd)
37
Posted by: Neo at Thursday, February 26 2009 01:58 PM (b/xwd)
38
Posted by: Aron at Friday, February 27 2009 05:42 AM (b/xwd)
39
Posted by: Kir at Saturday, March 14 2009 09:28 AM (b/xwd)
40
Posted by: Halo at Monday, March 16 2009 04:54 AM (b/xwd)
41
Hi. There is no such thing as an underestimate of average intelligence.
I am from Burundi and also am speaking English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Please note that the fsa do not regulate commercial loans or commercial."
With respect 8-), Panya.
Posted by: Panya at Thursday, July 23 2009 03:12 PM (2r5gt)
42
How are you.
I am from Laos and also now am reading in English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Female pheromone perfume best pheromones blog."
Regards :-) Kinneret.
Posted by: Kinneret at Wednesday, August 05 2009 12:00 PM (luFNf)
43
Hello. People fail forward to success.
I am from Antigua and also now'm speaking English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Event insurance and how to choose the right policy."
THX

, Hartford zyprexa lawyers.
Posted by: Hartford zyprexa lawyers at Monday, August 10 2009 01:30 AM (KphxK)
44
Hey. A man can do all things if he but wills them.
I am from Cape and now teach English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Life insurance leads call today toll free for insurance life leads and exclusive life insurance leads."
Waiting for a reply

, Discount perfumes in australia.
Posted by: Discount perfumes in australia at Thursday, August 27 2009 05:24 AM (KphxK)
45
Sorry. Misquotations are the only quotations that are never misquoted.
I am from Venezuela and also now am reading in English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: "Her scars recommend her to a link in iowa to have her acne and she is symptomatic to be used she otherwise longer has to make patients."
Best regards

, Aloe vera for acne scars.
Posted by: Aloe vera for acne scars at Tuesday, October 13 2009 12:59 PM (CkDXg)
46
Very professional site. Keep doing.
I am from Pakistan and too bad know English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: "For me, and only tough of my younger requirements, this is an own return.Such vldb administration comets constructed on the rosetta genomics great lot.During that newbank the single episodes could firmly be hit since the eye was in the business's second, where it would reasonably benefit any incorrect circuit for 15 features, hosting a former primary of agreement.Question data mean the wavelength of binary interests within media and the advertising of rosetta awareness in phase years."
Best regards :-D, Rosetta stone farsi.
Posted by: Rosetta stone farsi at Sunday, October 18 2009 01:13 PM (PS2kx)
47
Hey. One of the best rules in conversation is, never to say a thing which any of the company can reasonably wish had been left unsaid.
I am from Iraq and too poorly know English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: "It is being reported in dealers and informally where in car for providers opportunities; in cars for cursory drop tires; by 1,000-member dealers as auto of organized areas; by repairs themselves for software days; by information payments for repair pads."
With respect 8-), Dealer auto auctions nc.
Posted by: Dealer auto auctions nc at Wednesday, November 11 2009 12:50 PM (CkDXg)
48
Hi everyone. To repeat what others have said, requires education; to challenge it, requires brains.
I am from Togo and too bad know English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Teeth whitening, advanced seal results the best of claim, chemical and porcelain."
Thanks

. Whitelight tooth whitening.
Posted by: Whitelight tooth whitening at Saturday, November 21 2009 01:32 AM (PS2kx)
49
MPEG4 Converter Mac
enables users to convert general videos (MPEG4, WMV, AVI, MOV, VOB,
DIVX etc.) as well as HD videos (MTS, M2TS, TOD, MOD, MKV, etc) driectly
to the portable devices, like iPod, iPad, iPhone, iPod Nano, iPhone 4G,
iPad 3G, and so the forth.
VOB to MPEG4 Mac is the first choice for users to convert VOB to MPEG4 on mac with super fast speed and excellent quality.
If you want to convert MOV to MPEG4 on mac, I highly recommend this
MOV to MPEG4 Mac to you which can get output MPEG4 files with 1:1 quality of original files or a totally new one with much better effect.
FLV to MPEG4 Mac
is an all-in-one video converter for Mac OS X, it can smartly convert
between various kinds of video and audio formats. All the formsts like
HD video, general video, audio, flash video are supported.
Posted by: MPEG4 Converter Mac at Sunday, December 19 2010 06:25 AM (T72xc)
Posted by: 3dglasse at Wednesday, January 12 2011 07:47 PM (l+c2/)
51
I’ve bookmarked this because I found it interesting.
rapid prototyping. Thank for this great post,
plastic molds. i like what you read.I am definitely bookmarking this page and sharing it with my friends.I have been searching for this, was not on the similarpage in search as it was last week when I first saw it.
product design. Anyway,
plastic molding. thank God for search history!I am definitely bookmarking this page and sharing it with my friends.
Posted by: rapid prototyping at Monday, January 24 2011 07:16 PM (mKzDq)
52
A refrigerator water dispenser may increase the price of this appliance in addition to a refrigerator
block ice machine. However, the cash saved on the electric and water bills is a fair trade of these convenient features that lots of individuals and families prefer to not do without.
Posted by: pellet mill progressing at Wednesday, July 20 2011 09:03 PM (ETWu0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 19, 2005
A Women's Group - Looking Twice and It Looks Nice
Last week, a women's organization offered a $5,000 prize in a college
essay contest that is limited only to female college students and asks "what you think it means to be an independent woman in the year 2005." My first impression was, "Oh, boy. Another man-hating feminist group brainwashing young women." Well, mark it on your calendars, because today I am admitting that I am wrong. I did a double-take and found that it is a feminist organization, but in the good sense, and one in which parents could be proud of their daughters' participation. The group is the
Independent Women's Forum (IWF).
In viewing their
list of issues, I was surprised to see that they accept that men and women develop differently because of
biology rather than society. What a concept! Then, they have a section on the rewards of dating and romance rather than just "hanging out together." There is another section on rights for the
women of Iraq. They take positions on a broad spectrum of matters--from judicial appointments to balancing work and family.
This organization has strong common-sense women who can help properly teach young women and further their needs in life and business--without being radical and hating men. How refreshing! You may want to read some of their studies and refer them to others. In fact, suggest to any college women whom you know to enter their essay contest about being an independent woman. There's nothing wrong with that and the way they approach it.
I'm glad that I was wrong today. It's nice to see examples of women being strong without being filled with hate and bitterness. Now if we can just train them to cut the grass...okay, okay--I'm just kidding. Now, go read about them.
Posted at 06:10 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Great site. I loved the piece on the Hollywood babes having babies. Who would've ever expected to hear of a woman's group standing for self-reliance coupled with personal responsibility and not once was the word "vicitim" mentioned. My hat goes off to these ladies. Even if they won't let me enter thier contest. As the father of 3 lovely ladies and having a very strong and independant wife, I could give you one heck of an essay on Independant Women in 2005.
Where you find'em I don't know but please keep finding them.
Posted by: Veracious at Friday, August 19 2005 08:14 PM (bzCrm)
2
Hey! Thanks for the ref! Looks pretty interesting.
Of course, I think the idea that "... they accept that men and women develop differently because of biology rather than society" is a lil unbalanced. It's pretty well established that both nature AND nurture play significant roles in a child's development. Probably the emphasis on the "nature" side is a counterbalance effect, eh?
(And yeh, I'm well aware of many of the physiological differences�endocrinologocal, neurological, etc., down to even some fundamental cellular differences�ON AVERAGE, between the male and female of the human species. Viva la difference! :-)
Posted by: David at Saturday, August 20 2005 07:12 AM (ACL5/)
3
Just dropped In to let you know I have enjoyed reading you blog. I posted your link on my blog for the weekend.
I will read more later. later...
Posted by: Karen at Saturday, August 20 2005 07:41 AM (/3UO1)
4
David, you said it right...people develop how they do because of both biology and society. I meant to point out that this organization has enough common sense to see the weight of the biological issues.
I particularly liked this section of one of the articles on the site:
XY Files: IWF Panel Challenges Assumptions of AAUW
http://tinyurl.com/aglqy
"Hasbro, a major toy company, wanted to market their playhouse to both boys and girls. This is not because they believe there are no gender differences or that they are egalitarian androgynous feminists, they simply wanted to double their profits, which will happen if you can find a toy that appeals to both boys and girls. So they brought children into their 'fun lab' in Providence, Rhode Island, to observe how they interacted with their playhouse. The girls came in and played constructively with the baby carriage, the dolls, the stove, and the refrigerator -- basically played house. The boys came in and catapulted the baby carriage from the roof."
Posted by: Woody at Monday, August 22 2005 05:05 AM (t7ur8)
5
This site is a refreshing breath of fresh air. Thanks for the heads-up.
Posted by: civil truth at Monday, August 22 2005 07:06 AM (2eZsU)
6
This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free.
throw blankets, I stumbled on this while surfing for some popular lyrics, I’ll be sure to come back.Pretty nice post.
blanket throw, I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts.
faux fur throw, In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!
Posted by: Plush Blankets at Thursday, November 04 2010 08:32 PM (K/Wrr)
7
The
cheap saws used the newest technology and may cut miters and bevels. They are in a position to tilt for both and they can also slide forward. This makes them awesome for cutting a wide wood. You can carry them around easy and could be great if you want to rely on them outside of your workshop or at different jobs.
Another versatile saw is the
dualsaw. This can be a great bench saw for the home workshop. That you can do all sorts of things with it like crosscutting and doing stock work. You can also make sure they are tilt which helps for cutting miters and bevels. You can also rout together which means they are great for drilling stock.
Posted by: acupuncture for infertility fl at Friday, June 24 2011 01:20 AM (Q3mbi)
Posted by: komal at Saturday, July 02 2011 01:28 AM (IW/qJ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 24, 2005
The Party Is Just Beginning!
I have asked Woody to continue to post and be a part of GM's Corner. He has accepted... Let the games begin!
Welcome aboard Woody, really glad to have you!
Posted at 01:10 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
1
GM promised that, after ninety days, he would review my progress and consider giving me two weeks unpaid vacation a year and letting me participate in the retirement plan, which is based upon my pay that he has decided not to give me. How could I refuse an offer like that?! This has no downside risk and only upside potential.
Posted by: Woody at Tuesday, May 24 2005 03:55 AM (t7ur8)
2
Woody not only gets two weeks unpaid time off, but also gets the use of my car when I don't use it for a least 3 months. Further, I'm offering him a retirement plan based on 100% of the funds he earns from my site when he is on vacation. In other words, every nickle he earns from me on his time off will be doubled and deposited in a special offshore account. He knows the one I mean, after all, he helped me set it up.
Posted by: GM Roper at Tuesday, May 24 2005 04:01 AM (S2GJg)
3
GM--
When you consider our similar experiences, this match was only natural.
First, here's what you wrote about yourself in "About GM Roper":
"You may be wondering why I named this GM's Corner, simple really: When I first started commenting on other's blogs, I used only my first two initials and last name, other's responded to me using GM and one told me to go to my corner after a fierce battle verbal battle. Hence, GM's Corner."
Now, here's a similar experience that I had. When I was "discussing" something with reg over at Marc Cooper's, Marc interrupted the discussion by writing this:
Hey, Reg and Woody...This is about me and Nikki! Back to ur corners!
Posted by: Marc Cooper | May 11, 2005 07:25 PM
So, you can see that I've been ordered back to the corner, too; and, since your corner is as good as any, I'll squeeze in.
Posted by: Woody at Tuesday, May 24 2005 05:33 AM (t7ur8)
Posted by: 3dglasse at Friday, January 14 2011 07:59 PM (l+c2/)
5
WASHINGTON
– The still unsettled race for the Republican nomination to challenge
President Barack Obama in 2012 is getting more interesting. After months
of wildflower honey resisting calls to join the contest, Texas Gov. Rick Perry raw honey
said Friday he would consider it. That could reshape the GOP field,
adding a sitting governor who has never lost an election. Former Alaska
Gov. Sarah Palin also sent a jolt through the party with wildflower honey the announcement of a campaign-style bus tour along the East Coast, the maple syrup latest possible contender to stand up since Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels
announced last weekend that he would not run. And former New York Mayor
Rudy Giuliani is heading buckwheat honey to New Hampshire next week, further stirring speculation that he will jump into the still-gelling field.
Posted by: Veste de Cuisine at Sunday, May 29 2011 02:06 PM (lM9eX)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 21, 2005
Warning to Criminals - Don't count on Henry Fonda
If you are an accused and your trial is set in the State Court for Fayette County, Georgia during the week of June 13 - 17, 2005 and
if you are guilty, you better hope that I'm not on the jury. On the other hand, if you are innocent, you better hope that I am. That's right; I have received a jury summons for that time, and I believe in justice. (Quiz: Define "justice." Answer later.)
Perhaps, there's no danger to those on trial either way. The attorneys never pick me. The last time I was interviewed one attorney asked me if I had any preconceptions of the case, so I pointed to the judge and yelled, "
He did it." That'll get you off the jury really fast!
The clerk of court sent me a list of
reasons for getting out of serving. Maybe they have already made up their minds on me. However, I feel that it my duty to serve my community and uphold the sixth amendment in the Bill of Rights.
I watched an old movie the other day about juries. It is titled "
12 Angry Men" and was made in 1957. One of the stars is Henry Fonda, who is the do-gooder. The story is about a jury of twelve white men (when is the last time there was a jury like that?) who heard a case about a young man's crime. Eleven of the jurors "know" he's guilty from the evidence and are ready to go home to fire up the grills and cook some steaks. But, do-gooder Henry Fonda holds out and, one-by-one, convinces everyone to switch to an innocent vote. He talks about reasons like the kid has had some bad breaks and comes up with suppositions and conclusions totally absent from the evidence presented. I saw some reviews about how good it was, but those reviewers were suckered in by the "feel good" aspect of it rather than the legal aspects. A "Henry Fonda" better not be in my group. I'm planning on cooking out that week.
Now, I remember a good court scene in which Jack Nicholson tells off Tom Cruise in "A Few Good Men" and shouts "
You can't handle the truth." I have to say that to liberals a lot.
Does anyone have any tips or stories for me in case the attorneys slip up and select me for their jury? In the meantime, I'll be getting up to speed by watching "Court TV" and watching re-runs of "
Matlock" and "Jag." (I had a relative star in "Jag" this season. Impressed?) If Ben Matlock is the defense attorney, the real guilty person will break down and confess before we even get to deliberations.
Just in case, I know I have along way to go, because I thought that O.J. and Robert Blake were guilty when it turned out that they were innocent. With your advice and the examples from California juries, I'm going in prepared.
Posted at 08:00 AM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 505 words, total size 3 kb.
1
I am not able to advise you, Woody because to do so would probably be a violation of more federal statues than can be found in the Library of Congress. Never-the-less, I was excused during voire dire once when I said, in response to the question, "Can you render and fair and impartial decision in cases such as this?" -- and I said, "Absolutely, every idiot deserves a fair and impartial hearing."
______________________
Tell me that really didn't happen! I would have loved to have been in the room.
That might have been a good time to break into the Jack Nicholson monologue: "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way."
You might have received applause rather than have been been struck.
Woody
Posted by: Mustang at Saturday, May 21 2005 08:28 AM (nP7cz)
Posted by: steve at Saturday, May 21 2005 08:37 AM (WT3Gr)
Posted by: steve at Saturday, May 21 2005 08:38 AM (WT3Gr)
4
Wow! you seem to have missed the whole thrust of the movie. You are like the hard head that was the last holdout against the facts that were overlooked in the case as presented by the prosecution. Admittedly the defense council must have been republican because he must have agreed that the defendent was guilty and just went to sleep during the trial. Fonda just pointed out the inconsistancies of the trial, And the other members couldn't refute them. Sound familiar?
________________
Jim, I admit that I was in-and-out during the movie. However, I do remember "facts" being introduced and discussed that were not even brought out in the trial. Anyway, I'll be sure to try to see the whole thing next time.
Woody
Posted by: James S Melbert at Saturday, May 21 2005 10:18 AM (jtmmU)
5
C'mon, Woody, that's your response to the story? Doesn't it bother you a bit the way these asshole E-4's and E-5's have have impugned the honor and integrity of ALL of our armed forces, as well as our country, with their fucking outrageous acts? Or the fact that we apparently have a President who is such a weenie to stand up before the country to say in no uncertain terms that this is unacceptable, and will NOT be tolerated!
If so, I'd suggest you've been listening to way too much AM radio. The story is NOT the NY Times.
Apologize for the language. This really has me angry.
___________________
Does the left like ANYTHING that our military does, or is it only critical? See the next post above. I'll have to get back with you on the article. It's birthday time and, as reg says in reference to us, "life goes on."
Woody
Posted by: jim hitchcock at Saturday, May 21 2005 10:20 AM (Sf1Tt)
6
We would probably all like to agree with Jim on this, but the fact is that the President of the United States is IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND. He is precluded from making statements on any matter that may be tried pursuant to the UCMJ. If he does comment, it could result in charges being dismissed.
Posted by: Mustang at Saturday, May 21 2005 10:34 AM (nP7cz)
7
Happy Birthday, Woody...but you're missing the point. This is NOT what our military does. This is the action of some very sadistic pieces of excrement. Where in the hell were their officers? And what the hell was lacking in their training to make them think they could do this kind of shit?
If your crack about the left not liking anything the military does was directed at me, you're way off base. Hope you get underwear with hearts on it for a present.
_____________
Jim in no way was my remark directed at you. It was a general statement, which I know that many on the left don't like--which is the only time that they respect the individual.
I didn't connect the dots, but in another post I made reference to this being my son's birthday. But, when it is mine, I hope that I get better underwear than Saddam Hussein models.
Woody
Posted by: jim hitchcock at Saturday, May 21 2005 10:48 AM (Sf1Tt)
8
Woody,
1, the capitalist organ the NYT [whom you cited as praising the troops above] is an odd 'left' institution...
2, i'll go by my judgement, i was on target on the fake nature of the WMD claims, my bets are on the 'left-wing' military sources quoted and named in the NYT article and the documents.
3, go back and look at the records, Hamid Karzai is not a leftist.
4, such stories are not new and what they describe is torture, not 'abuse'. if the 'liberal' media were describing such horrific acts of murder and torture occurring against an American soldier, they'd be rightly referring to them as 'torture', no?
Posted by: steve at Saturday, May 21 2005 01:14 PM (WT3Gr)
9
Newsweek was right actually, the only thing they were wrong about was to offer the fake retraction when no retraction was necessary and no need was in order to follow the advice of the Pentagon or the Bush administration given their own record of systematically not caring about the truth when revelations of torture at Guantanamo have been raised time and again, not to mention the invasion and current occupation of Iraq.
I read their capitulation as pathetic, then again they're a major capitalist organ of information dissemination, no need to be too surprised.
Posted by: steve at Saturday, May 21 2005 01:18 PM (WT3Gr)
10
Juries... *sigh*
"In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man will be stoned to death, no matter how long it takes or how many other folks are unintentionally killed in the process."
Two juries I've been on were both civil cases. In both instances, a pronounced majority wanted to give something to the plaintiffs cos they felt sorry for them. In the first case, the only other sensible person on the jury and I could not persuade the rest and a 10-2 verdict (no unanimity required in this case) sunk justice. In the second case, "we" started out as three and another leaner and were able to review the evidence and testimony and let the rest draw a more sensible conclusion...
_________________
What gets me are juries that give outrageous awards saying that no one is going to have to pay it because it's covered by insurance.
Woody
Posted by: David at Saturday, May 21 2005 04:08 PM (ACL5/)
11
I think I'm tardy to the party Woody, but Happy Birthday to you!
As for jury duty, try this one: "I believe we all are responsible for our actions."
I doubt there is a defense lawyer in the land that would let you through upon hearing that.
_______________________
What if I said, "Who's really on trial here is society for failing the accused. If we send the accused to prison, shouldn't all of us go?" Now, of course, you know that I don't believe that, but I suspect that there are a lot of people who would eat that up.
Woody
Posted by: too many steves at Sunday, May 22 2005 12:46 AM (0QaNZ)
12
Oh man, I think applause might even break out, especially if you were to add, "And who are WE to Judge?".
________________
What if I said that I was going to hold a filibuster until we got a new judge?
W
Posted by: too many steves at Sunday, May 22 2005 07:01 AM (0QaNZ)
13
ugh, that's a myth woody, awards haven't been going up, nor have the rates of lawsuits in this country
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/articles_2004/study_debunks_lawsuit_explosion.html
___________________
steve, I think I'm going to scream. I put thoughtful answers here in response and approve the comments, but forget to save my response. I'm going nuts.
In a nutshell and not to re-type everything, the link refers to class-action suits. There have been many HUGE settlements in individual civil suits, and I have heard the jurors interviewed and their responses something like "no one has to pay for it since insurance covers the claim." That's the same logic that no one has to pay for anything that the government does.
Woody
Posted by: steve at Sunday, May 22 2005 11:09 AM (WT3Gr)
14
Here though you're using anecdotes, but I think that article is pretty correct in its assessment of actual trends statistically.
Don't go crazy, Seek wisdom in the grass, the anthills, the slides, and Maisy Mouse. That works for my son.
____________________
I basically use the analytical tools that were taught to me by watching "Blue's Clues."
W
Posted by: steve at Sunday, May 22 2005 02:22 PM (WT3Gr)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 03, 2005
Play Ball!
Play Ball!
Posted at 10:04 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 4 words, total size 1 kb.
1
It is rare for a game to live up to the pre-game hype. Never has that been more true than last night's drubbing of the Sox by the Yankees. My view may be skewed by geography, but all the talk in Boston over the past two weeks (5 months?) has been about how good our team is and how beating the Yankees in their place with Randy Johnson pitching was just a certainty. Meanwhile the Yankees seem to have just gone about the serious business of preparing themselves for the first game.
Many Red Sox fans are a bunch of yahoos. And some of the players have gone along for the ride. Hopefully this is a wakeup call cuz' I won't be able to take it if they go 0-162!
:-)
+++++++++++++++++++
Sadly, I agree. The Sox had a chip on their shoulders but it is good to have it knocked off so resoundingly so early in the season.
Posted by: too many steves at Sunday, April 03 2005 11:31 PM (0QaNZ)
2
Yay Yankees! Yay baseball!
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Oh, thou dastardly Ogre... hehe!!!!
The Yanks DESERVED that win, The Sox played like they had been up carousing all night and were thinking about beer, not baseball.
But, the season is young... REAL young.
Posted by: Ogre at Monday, April 04 2005 12:37 PM (Tppgx)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
131kb generated in 0.1338 seconds; 31 queries returned 157 records.
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.