Ham

If they are "moving".. what I wonder.. are they going to leave a forwarding address?

I was thinking of the "just get over it" suggestion some offer. the whole problem with that is, if one is living and learning, one is generally offered a different set of tools to analyze the "problem" year after year.. I've looked at some things I posted a few years ago, and it looks pretty trivial. I don't think a person "gets over it".. just often gets another set of tools to honestly take a look at the experience..

my first few days in Real Analysis.. the instructor is *wonderful*.. "now this is OK with you all?" Gawd.. at least he asks.. I can't figure out what is a legitimate *question* in this to begin with.. "yeah.. we're *OK*.." but I'm starting to get it.. last lecture I could actually follow what he was saying.. vewy, vewy scary.. I think it is the "make or break" point in mathematics.. It's the "same freaking stuff".. but on a whole different level.. we take off the training wheels.. the best I understand..

what I find astounding.. people actually ask "why are you going over the SAME FREAKING STUFF, year after stinking year.. there are whole new sets of possibilities.. whole different levels of deception and reality.. with the same set of facts (call them truths if you wish)..

Interesting.. I feel like I've been a moron.. Have you read the preface in Bullinger's "How to Enjoy the Bible"? this KIND of dialog is really not much different than Bullinger's description of his *high government* new *friends*.. very, very interesting, at least to me.. he left them un-named. For politically convenient reasons of course.. the whole point was: *they* sought Bullinger out, for the *gweatness* of da wordagawd he had to offer.. I'm starting to have a lesser regard for *Dr* (though he really was, unlike this pseudo 20th century counterpart) Bullinger.. he gets some respect from me though.. unless I learn different..

it would be rather "profitable" (ahem, choke, excuse me..) to go back and interview this un-named Indian Official.. so we deal with yet another breach of honesty and documentation.. he's quoted *somebody*'s words, and did not credit the source.. I'm trying.. but I just can't find one "right" concept in this situation..

Could have been one of your shill witnessing events you describe, Waysider.. you know.. an Indian official on the train.. herr manogawd.. and a supposed lame man paid five american bucks (probably a fortune in those days) to illustrate the "gweatness" of da word available to them.. I find it vewy vewy interesting he omits the man's name.. apparently that was not "important".. what was.. was the supposed guy's position.. so self-serving, no?

why didn't he NAME this supposed high ranking official? maybe he couldn't remember the name.. "I've hob knobbed with the elite of Parliment in New Delhi.." kinda vague..

apparently, his wet behind the ears not halfway yet around the block namesake of a grandkid doesn't offer much objection either..

But don't worry. There is still life for a ham.. just takes a whole heck of a lot more real estate than a postage stamp sized lot in the city will provide.. which is all I have, for now.. in layman's language, it means I need really, really long (or high) antennas.. if I want to talk to anybody in France, England.. Yugoslavia.. the last solar maximum, before work, I would talk with at least a half a dozen stations in Europe on ten meters with less than ten watts rf in the morning.. if I don't see the same thing for fifty years or so.. oh well.. it was fun once.. You know.. if Marconi was born in these lean times in the 1600's we may never have seen the radio art advance in the manner it has..

hmm. You convince me OK.. but what about the Sowers? His "holiness's (?)" words are carved in stone, dontcha know..

and that is?

here is a history chart from http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/images/sunspot_num_graph_big_jpg_image.html&edu=high note the very long low period in the 1600's. If it happens again, there is no lack of precedence or anything..

here is another chart you might find interesting.. I think wikipedia got it from NASA

we are now in a low part of an eleven year sunspot cycle. People started recording sunspot numbers about 130 years ago, and there is a recurring peak (and trough) roughly at an eleven year mark.

just a thought.. didn't the "scriptures" belong to the "Jews" before da way compiled them from texts and microfilm and such?

So fella.. and if you don't have at least somebody reading this stuff posted about *your* organization.. you are NUTS. My opinion anyway.. what does your MOTHER think about your *great* endeavor? pa seems to relish using your name.. and *uncle* mac.. what about ma? I'm sure she said SOMETHING.. what was it.. if the "grand" poobah isn't reading this.. staff, please pass the message..

You might be right.. but so far, I've observed the same arrogant attitude "we've got the majority of truth" in even the most benign offshoots I've had any dealings with.. I saw one guy just kind of disappear not to be heard from again.. along with a "damage control" session to shift the blame of lack of results of the great "law" of believing on HIM.. so what, some bigwig got sick and died.. so what the "law" apparently didn't work.. what about THIS character.. his "problems" were a result of a lack of "believing" in every stinking action he took.. and his sole question.. if the "law" was really that reliable, how could an "expert" in "believing" succumb to such a "negative" outcome. I would say it was a heart's cry for answers.. and how was it dealt with.. and this was what most here consider a relatively benign offshoot. after seeing this, and the overt arrogance of STIFFI.. I am not in the least bit interested in any offshoot.. I partly agree with one poster's estimation: most share the "spiritual dna" of the parent organization. I'm not saying its impossible.. but so far, they seem to share the same doctrine, the same fruit.. the only ones I know of exempt of this arrogance, abandoned this crap, and hooked up with.. God forbid.. CHURCHES.. denominations..

Perhaps. I think he is a victim of this carefully designed disgrace.. *they* gave him the *name*, probably stroked his ego with "prophecies" of moghood since he was in the crib.. painted a rosie picture of da way, it was.. I don't think he had a choice in the matter. They made him.. though still a NOVICE.. unmarried, unexperienced, knows little more theology than gramps "heritage"..yet somehow his position is supported by gawd almighty.. The majority of the flack goes to "uncle" mac, pops, and whoever else stroked his fragile ego.. He really thinks gramps is some kind of super-hero. Thinks da way was a mystical, mythical place of goodness before the "bad people" undermined gramps work.. yeah, they made him. I wonder what his ma thinks..

ah yes. Kind of like going to school in the old days..

I know friend.. heh.. but it did get me to think.. what kind of answers we might be soliciting in some of these problems.. this one is everywhere:

Its awful hard to produce a non offensive, politically correct math problem these days.. One of the newest.. no kidding.. I saw this one assigned to my students.. two planes 1200 miles apart (or something like that). One is travelling east at 492 mph.. the other, travelling west at 500 mph.. when do they meet each other? that was the question. I was thinking.. asking the students.. "what do we know about this problem.. etc.." nooooooo. Not me.. I would be among the first to say, "what do I KNOW? I wouldn't want to be a passenger on either of these planes.." no kidding..

hmm.. well, for this particular math problem, let's just let him run out of gas.. at 192 mph that can't be boo long..

Leave it to Google ads to come up with the *best* solution.. every offshoot needs a few of these.. http://www.jenesco.com/mold-and-mildew.html?gclid=CJmw4-P_05wCFQ8MDQodw0wUIg