rhino

How do you make money off of raising all these different animals?

hints and allegations ... maybe being more direct is in order at times. Eyes announced her book, which flies in the face of traditional Christianity. Fine. She does so in a place where a lot of Christians hang out, but doesn't offer scripture. It is just an announcement to buy the book. Fine. But considering the crowd, a little odd, to not offer a shred of information as to how this conflicting conclusion was reached. That in itself seems somewhat contentious to me. But fine ... everyone offers praise. But then in another thread discussing same sex marriage, eyes offers her opinion that homosexual acts are fine according to the Bible. CONTENTIOUS. When pushed for details, mum is the word ... and yet there are hints that she has greater knowledge but she will not parade her credentials. She will not discuss her book. Not Fine. She mentions her professor ... but nothing else ... what kind of hit and run comment is that? Does she need to know how to treat people in threads better? Does she need to be less hateful? What about going back to her thread here and making a "hateful" comment that some people just don't get her superior position, and so they are attacking her, before they hear her position? Is that love? The truth was we couldn't drag her elaboration out of her ... only hints of a professor and that she didn't need to parade her credentials. Yet she changed her story here, and actually did the "attacking" herself. If you are going to tell someone their beliefs are wrong ... and pretend you have some authority to tell them that .. I think you are obligated to follow through rather than walk away. It would be mean otherwise. Or hateful otherwise. I responded there, to her hit and run "attack" ... which she then walked away from. But then she brought it up here, how she was attacked for her belief. So here I am defending what I said there. She attacked other people's belief, but gave no reason except these credentials which she would not parade. Kimberly, this line ... some people are hateful .. and not you eyes ... these not so subtle backhanded comments are worse than my directness, as I see it. I don't see hate of homosexuals, but a Biblical question. Eyes "attacked" there and would not back up her comments. Then she comes here and says she was attacked for her belief, and in essence how closed minded those people are. Finally a verse or two were pried loose, and it seemed to reveal that eyes was just wrong. Eyes said in this thread It was eyes refusal to offer ANY reason for her belief that was the problem ... we waited and she said no ... she didn't need to parade her credentials. Later she offered an OT account, that I think jen-o plainly and (lovingly) rebutted. That was the end ... until eyes came her to say how she was attacked. There may have been more where I made those other comments, but again, I can't see eyes making these claims of authority unless she has something to back it up. But rather than backing them up, she complains hateful people aren't buying her book, so they can understand her better. Good grief. Now there is supposedly some "doctrinal" discussion. I haven't seen a thing there of substance. If people want to accept homosexuality, that is fine ... most people do, even Christians. But to try to redefine the Bible to fit in with the new belief is another thing. Why try to change someone else's foundation, just to make them fit in with what you believe? Or is it really just about trying to find a small niche market ... homosexuals that would like some Biblical approval ... and selling them what they want? And as wise as grandpa was.... maybe that needs to be expounded on ... too subtle for me. My Kentucky gay boy beans don't seem to reproduce very well ... which is fine .. but why talk about seed?

yeah, it was just a visual ... but if someone sails into troubled waters and fires some shots ... they can expect some attention. I should add I work freelance on my patrol boat ... we have beer in one cooler and we fish ... I only carry a bb gun and bottle rockets ... oh, and one of those big sling shots to fire water balloons ...

yes, I used the term because eyes had used it, I should have put it in quotes .. another chopped out of context quote ... ... I was somewhat aggressive by suggesting she didn't write a very good paragraph on Amazon, yet claimed some secret authority, plus the authority of authorship on the subject. It seemed if she was trained, that info should be "paraded" on Amazon. So I was sorta responding in kind as eyes had suggested authority and disagreed ... yet would not provide the authority. So I suggested the authority was invalid, based on what little eyes DID provide. On the OT verse shared by eyes, jen-o points made much more sense to me, as well, and I have yet to see anything to change my mind on the biblical view. But still, eyes book might be good for a gay kid that is looking for a way to tell his Christian mom he is gay. Hey Mom, I got you a book on the Bible I'd like you to read ... But the phrasing of this topic seems a little off .. I'd think maybe the homosexual act is biblically wrong ... as opposed to homosexuality. But I'm not a Bible person ... it just seems incongruous to me, to say it is fine with the Bible god. Anyway, it was not a personal attack ... Eyes fired the first shot, sa i said .. she suggested the bible said homosexual acts were ok ... I just questioned her authority, since at that point the only authority was that she had written a book. It was all in the context of, "by what authority do you speak?" Eyes was not forthcoming, so I investigated, and reported ...

right George ... I guess I cheated a little ... :) I remember him looking in his own house at his clone with his wife ... or was he the clone outside? you're up ...

That's the idea ... but not the one I was thinking of ...

sorry .. I forgot about this thread ... good thinking George ... well ... it looked exactly like him ... and gene testing would prove it was him ...

Yikes ... glad it missed the house ...nice walk-in door for your basement. In western Illinois, we got some golf ball sized hail a couple weeks ago ... pucnhed some holes in the siding. Other than that, about five inches of rain in the last ten days has kept the fields too wet to plant. But in just last Tuesday we had 2.5", while some not far away had 8". We seem to have missed more rain this morning thankfully, which is the system that just blew through your place. Those are some sturdy pool walls there ...

I was somewhat surprised Ralph did not know what was going on with all the sex stuff at an earlier time ... and there were other things. I missed him mentioning operating revelation. But I think he gave an honest picture of what happened and that the insiders would not give up the practice of adultery ... and hence of (criminal?) abuses as ministers and employers. His story seems mostly verifiable. We are discussing history ... this is not Monday, it is 22 years later. Nothing is going to change what led up to that point or what happened after. But many want to know "what happened". Many people that were at HQ say they did not see this slimy underbelly. I missed where Ralph pats himself on the back for not picking up on this junk earlier. Any of us that were there did not stop it ... some had a better chance than others. Actions not taken sooner? That is what made it a cult.

Part of the problem with such long term planning, is not knowing how much a barrel of oil will bring in five years, when maybe shale oil could be coming more on line. (I'm just guessing on years and numbers) But my understanding is that shale oil is feasible now, and technology will improve, but if oil drops back under sixty, three years of investment might be "wasted". And technology will improve on extraction and processing of shale oil and coal and all ... As you note, another problem is countries like Russia not exporting. I was just reading "Turning off the Taps" about the countries that used to export, but now import. Mexico provides about 14% of the oil the U.S. imports. On any given day that makes it either the #2 or #3 leading source for U.S. oil imports after Canada and Saudi Arabia. Given that the U.S. currently imports close to 70% of its oil needs, the Mexican oil is critical. But here’s the thing. Using straightforward ELM calculations, Jeffrey Brown is confident that Mexico will ship its last barrel of oil to the United States -- or anywhere else, for that matter -- about 6 years from now, in 2014 So we do need a plan ... I'm thinking we need to push our shale oil projects now ... and ANWR ... but this CO2 tax is completely wrong headed. We don't need to shut down exploration and development of these fuels that work. Coal could be important, and about a thousand nuclear plants could be sarted right now. If countries start to starve from lack of oil or food, things may get real interesting real fast. This AGW talk will go right out the window if another leg down happens in dollar stability, or recession, or any number of fronts. At least I can fuel my wood burner from the woods, and grow some food. Yeah ... clean is good ... but I don't see that we need to be 10 times cleaner than everyone else. And we need more CO2 so we can grow more crops. :)

Another personal secretary later saw things she knew were very wrong ... another old timer ... she was crying once talking to me, but didn't quite give details ... as I recall she said vp felt bad or knew it was wrong .. she said Chris and her supported each other in dealing with the whole situation. I now have much less doubt about exactly what she was referring to ... but she never left ... she is still there I think ... lifer ... :(

Yeah .. the hysteria is the problem. But that is what works to get people to vote for things. Maybe Rachel Carson wasn't directly responsible for getting DDT banned, but the hysteria was unstoppable. Science showed no harm from DDT, but that no longer mattered, there were birds to save. But that was bad science. So malaria killed millions that may have been cheaply saved. AGW seems similar ... people "know" Gore's film ... so something has to be done ... NOW. Lotsa coal, I hear we are the Saudi Arabia of coal. Oil ... I don't know ... current known reserves seem to grow ... and all this shale oil that we haven't even started to tap. And we haven't even started to pump off our coasts, not to mention ANWR. But of course conservation and clean air are important.

Thanks RR ... CO-PI is lost on me ... I found Co Principal Investigator ... is that right? Anyway, cool you were directly involved. I'm just trying to pry info out of you ... :) Back to Jupiter ... well, here is a stop off at Mars ... Mars's southern polar ice cap, seen here in true color, has shrunk in recent years due to planetary warming—similar to what's happening on Earth. Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory. Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. (Get an overview: "Global Warming Fast Facts".) Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures. In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row. Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun. "The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said. National Geographic fast facts says man is causing all or most of the warming ... I don't see how they caused glaciers to recede ... and much of their claims of settled science is unsettled to me ... but they have a right to their opinion, and to publish what sells best. :) Yes RR, it is too easy to stray from talking of the science ... to me Gore's movie misrepresented the science, and the Global Warming topic is rarely really about the science. I think Gore said a 20 foot rise by the end of the century. The UN report "guesses" ... • Sea level could rise between 7 and 23 inches (18 to 59 centimeters) by century's end, the IPCC's February 2007 report projects" But I find some statements from National Geographic simply not true, or not known ... they quote from the IPCC (UN) report ... humans have caused all or most of the current planetary warming. But your previous comments and background make me think you present the science side ... so a science only forum could be good. Of course there would be a lot of learning for most of us ... and I guess most of this is available somewhere on the internet.

Thanks P-Mosh ... for making many good comments. I'd like to tap in on the grown local trend, though I really don't think transportation costs are quite as great as portrayed ... still ... why not help the local economy more? I think the CBS poll is misleading ...( imagine that.) Nearly half of Americans believe global warming is having a serious impact now — up 14 points since 2001. Another third think the impact of global warming will be felt some time in the future. Few think it won't have a serious impact. Three-quarters think the weather in the past few years has been stranger than usual, with global warming cited as the biggest cause. IS GLOBAL WARMING HAVING AN IMPACT? Now Yes, now 49% Will in the future 36% Won't have an impact 11% First, the poll said "having an impact" and 49% said yes. It did not say SERIOUS impact. And it certainly did not say what you said ... that people feel "threatened". Also, I don't trust CBS at all. Who did they poll? How can they say the Dem's are going to provide the US with the energy we need, when they are the ones blocking all the new exploration. Looks like another biased poll from cBS. Plus the news of catastrophe sells well, and many are caught up in the "psycho-drama" of the tidal wave pouring over New York. Nuke plants, better public transportation yes ... but it seems there is a radical push to squeeze out fossil fuels, when we still have 300 years of coal and oil remaining. Maybe some incentives for cleaner tech, but a radical move could snap our economy, especially considering the current state. AGW seems just a tool for pushing a radical left agenda ... we conservatives haven't killed scientists much of late. Science is good, but not "Silent Spring" type activist science, which killed millions.

True Groucho .. I would like to sit in that class ... but I have hints. :) I really meant nothing bad by "aloof". Anyway, I will try to to follow those hints ... so this is good motivation for me. I am sorry RumRunner was offended. Even using Hap's chart I see the same thing. WE have time and global temps ... how many other dimensions are needed? We won't have altitudes for very many years ... so I'm left to guess why it is misleading ... "I'll give you a hint" can be more derogatory than "aloof" .. but I assumed it was not meant that way.

The chart and the text said it was significantly colder GLOBALLY. It just mentioned the anecdotal evidence anecdotally. Horribly bad reading on your part. Nobody trades on milliseconds ... some do on minute charts or 5 minute charts. Few try to determine a long term direction from chart alone, unless they are buying long term ... in which case they look at fundamentals more often, and a chart for an entry point.But stocks aside, it is noteworthy to look at shorter term changes to try to determine cause and effect, perhaps. Still, the chart I gave goes back to 1979, so I'm not sure why you think I'm only looking at one or three months. Your insightful rebuttal is not based on what I said nor on the chart. I was not looking at one location or one month, as you claimed. I was looking globally over 30 years. (with a glance at Jupiter) But that said, I don't know the significance of sounder units of the lower troposphere. I will try to follow RR's hints, and see what he is getting at. The chart I had showed a very large drop over the last 15 months. It looks to me like Hap's chart shows the same thing, but his goes back to 1880. From Hap's chart, we are (globally) now 0.3o C warmer now than 128 years ago. This last 15 month global 0.75oC drop is significant ... exactly how significant? I don't know. Are those old temps really that accurate? Are the new temps influenced by the urban settings of the weather stations? you are making up things all through your response ... heat wave or a cold wave ... I don't think I've ever discussed global warming in those terms. There seem to be a lot of people lately, paraphrasing me to say something that I never came close to saying. I guess it is easier to win an argument if you just change what the other guy said. As long as the other guy can't reply. I look at a 30 year chart of global temps (and at Hap's 130 year chart), and you claim I am looking locally at one month.

"Aloof" is not an insult at all. I don't see how you even took it that way. reserved and remote: stood apart with aloof dignity.adv. At a distance but within view; apart. It is how you defined your position as I saw it. Anyway, besides noting my charts were misleading, you could probably have offered how the recent trend fits in with the longer trend, and CO2, and some other insight. Since you seem to hold that info, and noted your participation, it seems odd you would not offer what you know, yet still participate here partially. On this topic you yourself said you would not participate ... that seems aloof. I see now one definition has "haughty", but I never use it that way. Still you did drop the credentials but didn't offer a better answer than the chart I saw. I'm curious about how significant this change in increase really is. I didn't think El Nino lasted a decade. Anyway, it was not an insult, nor did I intend it as one. As a scientist, you could offer an opinion on the Jupiter significance, or the recent cooler data ... you are here, but only give hints. Isn't that "aloof"?

you are the one that quoted the stock question. When an uptrend is broken, it is a short, the way most play. there is some reason to think the same way for other things ... for some reason it is not going up at the same rate it was ... what has caused the break? El Nino? a volcano? If you are in a car and flooring it from 0 to 60 ... if you let off the gas, you may not slow down, but the uptrend will be broken ... I'll let RR give you the calculus ... I thought you were a math whiz .. :)

I'm no expert, but I spent about 14 hours a day for two years working at working stock charts. My answer to that question is YES ... that stock is a short. But it is not a stock, so the same rules don't apply. Still, the uptrend is clearly broken. But besides that, there is reason to question if we have accurate "global land ocean" temps, especially so far back. But even now, there is evidence of weather stations sitting on asphalt or by air conditioners ... it is not a controlled experiment. Still, we know the glaciers left Illinois ... so there must be warming. The glaciers did not retreat from man, they will not return because of man, as I see it. Do we want to be colder, or warmer?

Make IT a religion? Maybe you could quote me so I would know what you are confused about this time. AGP ... man made global warming ... there has been warming since glaciers were in Illinois ... which was before the CO2 rise from man. But was there a CO2 rise anyway? The warming trend is in line with trends that had nothing to do with man. The trend will probably continue regardless of what man emits in the way of CO2 ... as I see it. I see no empirical evidence to the contrary.

I didn't correctly refer to them as Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit ... that is just from my link ... as is the chart My belief is there is a post glacial warming trend ... no glaciers in Illinois ... but lately it has stalled a little ... maybe even backed up. As I think you said ... models can be tweaked either way for CO2 or a hundred other details (my paraphrase) to get warming or cooling. And most of the "conclusive" stuff is based on models (and money). I don't quite see why you want to stay so aloof ... but fine by me ... it still seems there is no good evidence man's CO2 is a cause. Also spring has been cool ... but a few years does not a trend make. I would suspect the slow warming will continue, it has since glaciers were here and will till it changes on Jupiter maybe. If I get some energy on this subject again, I will pm you ... I appreciate the offer. For now the science seems clearly unsettled, and the $6 trillion is not to stop the inevitable rise of CO2, but to gain control of the money.

true jen-o ... we can joke about it .. and whistle past the graveyard ... and fiddle while Rome burns ... here is more hilarity ... UAH: Global Temperature Dives in May June 3, 2008 Confirming what many of us have already noted from the anecdotal evidence coming in of a much cooler than normal May, such as late spring snows as far south as Arizona, extended skiing in Colorado, and delays in snow cover melting in many parts of the northern hemisphere, the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) published their satellite derived Advanced Microwave Sounder Unit data set of the Lower Troposphere for May 2008. It is significantly colder globally, colder even than the significant drop to -0.046°C seen in January 2008. The global ∆T from April to May 2008 was -.195°C brrr ... it really has been a cool spring .. as David noted ... I feel a cold wind blowing ....

this may be a baseball on TV, feet up, beer in hand response ... but oh well I attacked ... but on one other thread, I questioned whether there was really any honest doubt about the Bible clearly saying homosexual acts are wrong. Jen-o supplied some verse to that effect, as well as a simple and to me, convincing rebuttal to an eyesopen comment regarding some OT verses. But as subtle as it was, eyesopen fired the first shot. She hinted that the Bible was not so clear, as her 30 years of research had shown. But she would not discuss her whole book ... and did not need to parade her credentials .. and some hints about a professor. But that hints that she has credentials to parade, but we were not worthy? Since the topic was partly about "you bigoted Bible people need to accept gay marriage, but WE will let you keep your adultery beliefs for now", it seemed someone stepping in and claiming some authority because they had written a book on the subject, might be questioned as to their authority. But instead the authority was trotted out, but no follow up on just what backed up these 30 years of research and why was there no discussion of the actual research. We were left to buying the book. Then when a few verses were discussed, I think the proper context was fully presented by jen-o. and that was the end. Someone started a new topic on the subject in the doctrinal section, and they said homosexual acts were not "sinful according to the Bible ... but again they gave no evidence, but they did try to obviate some verse as not being adequate, asking for something other than the obvious. Yet they presented nothing. Anyway, I think Eyes' fired the first salvo ... and I returned a shot across her bow. But I was just the little patrol boat, eyes returned fire with an OT interpretation, the cruiser Jen-o then sent a more substantial volley ... and the battle ended on that. OK ... let the discussion continue ... I'll get another beer and popcorn and watch from behind the cruiser ship

A man finds himself, cheating on his own wife, with his wife, in his own house, and she is none the wiser. I took just a little poetic license ...maybe he didn't actually have sex, but he played the role of hubbie ...

It is better to get the patient drunk before pulling out the shrapnel ... but I understand, I don't think much of many of the way corps either ... but corps are pretty much neutered here ... actually, there are no way corps here that I know of ... it is a distant memory that seems rather surreal. Did it really happen? Or do we just invent it here at Greasespot and on our hard drives?