"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong

Bill Baka > wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>> Bill Baka > wrote:
>>> adm wrote:
>>>> "dgk" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:55:47 -0800, The Real Bev
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill Baka wrote:
>>>>>> My grandkids live in an affluent (not rich, but containing mostly
>>>>>> those monster tract homes that are going for $3/4 million now)
>>>>>> district. They have "lockdown" drills. That's what's supposed
>>>>>> to happen when a weapon or other threat is discovered. The kids
>>>>>> drop flat on the floor and the staff turns out the lights. I
>>>>>> need to find out more...
>>>>> Unfortunately that would appear to be a smart thing to plan for
>>>>> considering the number of actual incidents. Back when we were kids
>>>>> we had those idiot abomb drills. Climb under the desk and put your
>>>>> head between your legs. And, as the precocious kids added, kiss
>>>>> your ass goodbye.
>>>> Do you not think that making weapons far harder to get hold of
>>>> might help a bit ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No. There would just be a black market for guns. We just need to get
>>> rid of some people and maybe arrest them before the fact. Many times
>>> the shooter has had a history of animal abuse or other signs that he
>>> is whacko, and the police never put 2 and 2 together.
>>
>> Trouble is the huge numbers who abuse animals and who never gun down
>> kids in schools.
> There is where the problems arise. We had a rather famous murder trial
> here (Polly Klas(sp?)) and the killer was a known animal sadist plus a
> lot of other stuff back to when he was 6 years old. How much of being
> a red flag does someone have to have to be monitored?

Monitoring just isnt feasible. You do jail the dregs like that at
a decent rate so they only get to murder other dregs in jail etc.

Brent P wrote:
> In article >, Bill Baka wrote:
>> Brent P wrote:
>>> In article >, Bill Baka wrote:
>>>
>>>> Impractical is a stick in San Francisco. They put stop signs at the top
>>>> of a hill and unless you have a hand operated emergency brake you can
>>>> roll back and get the car behind you. That's the one place where I don't
>>>> want to have a stick.
>>> After being hit a few times maybe people would get the message and not
>>> stop 2 inches behind someone
>
>
>> Maybe that counts as a rear end collision and the other guy pays for
>> being that stupid. I would be on the sidewalk if I was cycling there,
>> and I don't even want to think about how fast a downhill could be on
>> pavement. I have nearly fried a cars brakes and don't know if bicycle
>> brakes would cook either(and--or??).
>
> The brakes on my Giant road bike did fine going down the bluff in WI to
> the Mississippi river. Also had no problem with the rental road bike
> riding down from Iao Needle on Maui. Now going up that bluff on the
> giant, that did do something to the bike
>
> Of course I'm a flatlander here in IL, so those are about the biggest
> downhills I've ever had to deal with. I would doubt an urban hill would
> be worse, but all I've seen of San-Fran in person was from the air and the
> airport, so I wouldn't know how bad the hills there are.
>
>
I was born in Chicago so I know how hard it is to find a hill, any hill.
There have been bluffs that I know were over 10% but lucky for me they
were pretty straight. There is one boat ramp/road about 15 miles into
the mountains (foothills) that runs about 15--20%. The bottom is a boat
launch and I almost went into the water. Coming back up was so steep it
was a walker. It might have been ridable by a total masochist but even
walking and dragging a bike was painful. Gotta love California and it's
geographical diversity.
Bill Baka

Bill Baka > wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Bill Baka > wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Bill Baka > wrote

>>>>> Impractical is a stick in San Francisco. They put stop signs at the top of a hill and unless
>>>>> you have a hand operated emergency brake you can roll back and get the car behind you. That's
>>>>> the one place where I don't want to have a stick.

>>>> Your gross incompetance is your problem, as always.

>>> Should I even bother with assholes?

>> Never ever could bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

> That line seems to be YOUR standard come back.

Only with the pathetic excuses for bull**** artists like you.

>>> Or should I be nice and just call you an idiot who has never tried a stick in S.F.???

>> But have done it fine in places much worse than that thanks.

> Grammar boo boo.

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.

>>> Try it,

>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

> You would have to be 80 for that to be true. I'm a senior, not a junior.

>> In grossly underpowered cars too.

>>> then bitch about it.

>> Nothing to bitch about.

> Getting beat at the stoplight uphill drag races is "bitch about" fodder.

Not for anyone with a clue.

>>> It can be done with a foot emergency brake but you have to pull the
>>> release at the same time as letting out the clutch and giving it gas,

>> Completely routine for anyone but a complete incompetant.

> I can do it but prefer not to.

You are lying now or you were lying originally. Cant have it both ways.

> I tend to double clutch when I downshift. Do you even know what that is?

Corse I do.

> I do it on a motorcycle too.

Well whoopy ****ing do. Have this funky leather medal. If you're a
really good boy we might even spray it with gold paint if you stop boasting.

>>> while wearing out the release mechanism.

>> Just another pig ignorant fantasy. Never ever wore out any of mine.

> Lucky turd then, aren't you. (:-)

Nope, not a shred of luck involved.

>>> Or maybe you have 3 feet, no doubt all of them left.

>>> Only those who have driven S.F. know what I mean.

>> SF aint the only place that hilly, ****wit.

> L.A. is fun too,

So are any hilly areas.

> like driving Laurel Canyon road in the dark on a motorcycle. Been there, done that, after a 6 pack
> no less. 1969.
> I forget what else I did that year, but damn, was it fun.

Soorree, you have flunked on the gold paint.

In article >, dgk wrote:
>On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 15:31:04 GMT, "no spam" > wrote:
>
>>Poverty is almost always a result of bad choices. People choose to not work
>>in school. People choose to have kids when they know they can't afford
>>them. People choose to drop out of school. People choose to sell drugs to
>>make a fast buck. People choose to screw up their lives why should I be
>>FORCED to pay to "fix" their problems?
>
>When I was a kid I attended PS 3 in the Bronx (NYC). In the middle of
>second grade my parents scraped together enough money to move us to
>Queens, and a better school district. They evaluated me and were going
>to place me in the "slow" classes because I was already way behind
>reading level. My parents talked them into putting me in the regular
>classes and within a few months I was ahead of reading level and going
>into the "gifted" classes.
>
>My parents attended an open school night and the principal asked them
>just what was going on in that school in the Bronx that I kid like me
>was behind reading level. I don't know that they could answer the
>question.
>
>That was over 40 years ago. I suspect my life would be very different
>if I wasn't lucky enough to get out of PS 3. Your argument that
>poverty is almost always a result of bad choices is simplistic. It
>takes a very special person to climb out of a crappy environment. It
>happens, but lots of good people get stuck.

I have heard how things have a high rate of going wrong in public
schools where over 20% of the students are from families that have
generally been in poverty. I see one reason being popularity of "lowest
common denominator" cultural forces, and a related reason being popularity
of making bad choices when enough others do so.
There is such a thing as a "poverty culture". And children from such a
"poverty culture" have a high rate of not paying attention in class, not
doing homework, being disruptive, and cutting classes and outright truancy,
especially after 5th grade. This is highly because their parents do not
keep these kids on the straight-and-narrow and all-too-often do not
adequately value education but blame their poverty disproportionately on
factors other than lack of getting an available education.

- Don Klipstein )

Brent P wrote:

> Of course I'm a flatlander here in IL, so those are about the biggest
> downhills I've ever had to deal with. I would doubt an urban hill would
> be worse, but all I've seen of San-Fran in person was from the air and the
> airport, so I wouldn't know how bad the hills there are.

I drove down Lombard Street in the van. Manual brakes and steering,
auto trans in low. I was terrified that my right leg would give out
before we got to the bottom and my right leg was weak for the next day
or so. Google earth doesn't do it justice.

--
Cheers, Bev
===================================
New sig on order, watch this space.

Rod Speed wrote:
> Joe Fischer > wrote
>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>
>>> And the results the catholic systemic schools get
>>> shows that it aint really about money anyway.
>
>> It is when the liberal federal government sets the
>> requirements for redistribution of collected taxes.
>
> No it isnt when those schools get much better
> results with much less money per brat.

BUT -- the Catholic schools, like all private schools, are free to kick
out students who aren't willing to work or play by the rules. The
public schools have no such luxury -- they can kick kids out for weapons
violations and other similar hazards, but they have to accept the rest.

--
Cheers, Bev
===================================
New sig on order, watch this space.

Joshua Putnam > wrote:

> In article >,
> says...

>> Chicago is in the east?

Probably to most people in the United States, weatherman geography
sounds out of touch with reality.

> Though of course most people don't call it the east

With the exception of TV weatherpeople, hopefully most of us don't
use the term "midwest" when talking about Chicago's location.
Currently, apparently Merriam-Webster is calling Illinois "central"
United States.

> because standard U.S. vocabulary was set when there were 13 states
> and the rest of us were Territories.

Fortunately language isn't set in stone anymore. Language changes
continuously. The ability to adapt probably shows strength, and vice
versa.

Good luck and have fun.

On Feb 9, 2:46 pm, Bill Baka > wrote:
>
>
> Like the Bible is supposed to say is "God helps he who helps himself",

That's not in the Bible.

That's a Calvinist thing - the same Calvinist idea that those that
*have* are blessed, and that those who *have not* have some sort of
character flaw, or are sinful. Also things not supported by
Scripture.

Southern Baptists are pretty highly Calvinist.

E.P.

On Feb 9, 7:49 pm, Scott en Aztlán > wrote:
> dgk > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >I've always preferred manual but they really are impractical in the
> >big city.
>
> I live in one of the most sprawling urban metroplexes in the world,
> and my manual transmission is not impractical in any way.

Agreed.

Manual tx is easy to use, and almost a no-brainer once you get in the
habit.

E.P.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/...ge/default.stm

What more do you want?

This is particularly interesting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6196804.stm