socks

ChattyKatathy, you're going into Slide! Love it! I would suggest trying a couple out in a store, glass and metal. I've got one of each. The metal has a little brighter tone as you'd expect and the glass smoother, richer. I tend to use the metal because it fits better, and don't use either much. Fit is the most important thing. It should fit snug enough to stay on your fingfer but not so it's hard to get off. Too loose and you'll have trouble getting it to lay solid on the strings, it won't feel right. You've got to pick a finger too, whether to wear it on the 3rd ring finger, left hand or the little pinky finger, left hand. You may want to go with the ring finger to start, to get your control together. It's a little easier I've found, but again I don't play it that much, usually use the little finger slide as it fits better. A major point of the technique for slide is "muting". If you just lay the slide over the neck and move it around you'll get all the noice from the strings "behind" the slide. As you look down, that's to the left of your hand, back towards the headstock. That has a sound all it's own and isn't bad if that's the sound you want. But to get single note stuff and all the little bluesy figures clean, you mute. That means, as you hold the slide down over the strings, say it's on your 3rd ring finger, you lay the 2nd finger down over the strings, just let it lay there hitting them without actually pressing them all the way down to the fretboard. That will eliminate the extra noise of the slide moving around, clean up the sound a little. If you're playing it with the guitar down on your lap, face up, you'd hold the slide in your left hand over the strings, pretty much in your thumb and index finger, laying flat out, not holding it with the tips of the finger. Mute with the other fingers, down over the strings. Fingerpicks - I have a set of them and again, don't use them all that much. But a really good banjo player I know recommended John Pearse thumbpicks and sent me a couple. I really like them, they're a good size, not too big. Again, you want to get a size that's snug but not cutting off the blood. And you can get one that's close but a little loose and bend it to fit. I use John Pearse plastic, white. Finger picks - I've got several Nationals. I'm only moderately proficient with them, and need a lot of warmup but these came with recommendations. Look for the ones that don't cover the entire finger, but come to a little point at the end. They're less clunkly, to my feel. That's sort of quick,but I think it's really exxx-citing!!! Good for you!!!

Best of all, we have a new "Greasespot Gem". Don't tell me there's no profit! It's not worth getting torn up over, indeed. I've actually learned some new things on this thread I didn't know before, and that's the kind of information my brain has space to store. Yes, allanW-blacks only get to use that word, nobody else. Being an Aussie, you probably didn't know that. They use it all the time - it's kind of a term of endearment, despite the impression you may get from this thread, sort of like saying "honeybee". Go ahead, try it sometime. Let us know how it goes. See? Questions answered, too. Enlightenment is the order of the day. Hey! Thanks GreasyPerson! I like tests. Theyre always fun! My score on the Race thing - You have completed the African American - European American IAT. Your Result Your data suggest little to no automatic preference between European American and African American. Go figure. I actually prefer that Irish freckley look, (HOT!) but there weren't any of those, at least that I could conjure up. There were definitely some unusual looking people - that one guy with the sort of bushy eyebrows looks suspect but deep in his eyes I sensed a softness that was endearing, although I bet he hides it from all but his closest friends. I even saved screen prints of the results page and the ending survey, I like certificates too! It's set up interesting, I don't see how a person could score one way or the other too heavily, but then I haven't taken any of the others yet.

Yah, but not for long. I smell a buyer!!!

Linda Z, you reminded me of how paranoid a lot of people got in the Final Days, the latter half of the 80's. One guy, great guy, I remember he said he went to Costco? Maybe it was Price Club, one of those places, and bought a pallette of cassette tapes and he was dup'ing SNS tapes and teaching tapes of all kinds, by the dozens it sounded like. I guess it had it's value, some of those old SNS tapes have some funny and interesting things on them. I bet you know who I'm thinking of. But yeah, I bet if we had a quarter for everytime somebody shoved a tape in our hand and said "listen to this! it explains everything!!!!" we'd be retired right now and dialing in wireless from Hawaii. I learned a great lesson through all of the ownership/copyright stuff though. My entire library of books, pamphlets and manuals that I've written are owned solely by me, socks. They're mine. This allows me to publish at will to an ever growing audience of eager buyers. In fact, I'm even now in the final stages of setting up a distribution network for resellers that will allow for several layers of profit, I mean blessings, to be distributed. For a moderate sum (considering) resellers will have limited rights to resell such perennial fav's as "Will the Real You Please Move - You're Standing In My Spot", "Why I'm Right and How You Can Be Too" (including the workbook!), and minor obscurities like "Adolf's - The Lost Years" and "Millet - Fun Holiday Recipe's". I know this is going to mean a lot to so many peop's. Hey, I owe it 'em. It's only right. They really do explain everything.

Those watches are cool, on face value alone! I wonder if there's a sweep hand model that will shred? Aaah, but I digress. I recently came into temporary possesion of a really cool instrument. I'm taking photos of it for a friend and getting it appraised. Soon as I get 'em worked out I'll post. It's a very old Gibson Lap Steel. Has the 'old' Gibson gold logon on the head and based on what I've been able to find out about it looks to be from the 40's. The original Gibson Lap Steel was put together by Alvino Rey, and the pick up for it - this was late 30's, was used in the Gibson ES-50 electric f-hole, the guitar Charlie Christian used. I don't know yet if this has that model pickup or not, it may not be that old, dunno. When I was a wee tyke the grammar school I went to would bring in different people every month or so to perform, kind of a cultural enhancement thing. It was a Catholic school, God bless 'em they did some cool things. And some very uncool things too, like weekly "Dance" classes, that....oh, it's too dark to even discuss. The horror, the horror..... But they had a guy come in that did a mini-concert one day, playing pedal steels, lap steels and the like. It was Alvino Rey. He did really cool Hawaiian stuff, some pop stuff. And he could make them make all kinds of cool sounds using his slide bar, volume and tone controls. "Here's a plane!" and he'd do a low hover on the bass string and then a dive bomb sound. "Bombs!" and all of this noise and searing squeals. He made it moo, like a cow, and cry like a baby. I was fascinated, it totally blew me away. I was in awe afterwards. Years before I heard Hendrix and Roy Buchanan do the same kinds of thing I had those sounds stuck in my head. It was quite an experience for such wee ones.

Aw, don't sweat it Jonny. And Excie, you're wunnderful, and I appreciate the words. Fondly, your pal. :) I hesitate to keep going on with it because Sudo's original post dealt with a specific comment and question. (deleted out all the incredibly insightful comments I'd made because ex10's right - it's their thing it'll work itself out and I'm way too gabby for anyone's good) That's all. You wouldn't do that, maybe others wouldn't. Maybe I wouldn't. That they are isn't a bad thing. IMO. He was about as insulting and demeaning to them as a person can get. I think they have a right to try and make it happen. :) Maybe it will be meaningful to him. IMO, his Kramer character was the most valid thing on "Seinfeld" anyway, so I'll give him that, but that's a whole nother topic.

I guess we agree to diagree, Jonny. Petty, inexcusable. I'm not sure where they match, but whatever. The story does take on myth-like perspective even after this short a time - "He used the "n" word so now he's getting sued". - No, he used the "n" word, told them they'd be lynched if this was 50 years ago, and carried on in anger with no break of character to indicate he was anything but dead-on serious and angry at the disruption to his "act". In my world, that qualifies as threatening, whether you're an "entertainer", whoever you are. Cross the line, it's crossed. I think those guys have a right to angry and to want resolution and are purusing the only way they'll probably ever get face-to-face with him and settle it, whatever that settlement is. "He didn't do any damage, it was just words, those guys are okay". - They're "black", Afro-American, whatever you want to call it, they were identified as an enemy, quite literally. He couched his comments with a reference to "words" we still can't use, but seemed to be using the words to reflect an honestly felt belief. It's easy to say they weren't damaged by mere words. If I acted towards the President the same way I'd be in jail right now being examined by psychiatrists. Laws. It strikes me as a flash-point for other debate. It really isn't solely about the "n" word at all. It's about that incident between those people and what happened there. To say he called them a "bad" name and that's what it's all about isn't factually true IMO. Buuuuuut, so it goes. It does make one think. I hope he gets it all worked out and is better for it.

I understand ya, Jonny. My take on you're phrasing that they were suing for "something as petty as this" doesn't stack up with how I view it, that's all. Petty maybe, compared to a comet hitting the earth tomorrow, or a 9.5 earthquake hitting the West Coast. Nuclear war. Compared to those things it's of lesser impact. I suspect that any action these guys took against him would be subject to the same critique- unjustified to some degree over such a 'petty thing'. And I'd suspect if he'd taken a testorene shot and been a man about it instead of going on TV and whining how sorry he was to the world, there might not even be a suit. Come on - the guy called Jesse Jackson. What did he think that was going to do? Protect him? Absolve himself somehow? He had a good run on Seinfeld. He's not that funny outside of that, that I've seen. Doesn't mean he doesn't have talent, but the whole Seinfeld schtick was just a cultural riff wrapped around a demographic - baby boomers and their parents. It was an amplified version of "boy, ever wonder where that other sock goes in the drier? Man, that really BUGS me". Mad Magazine did it in the 50's and 60's. Steve Martin did the zen-state-of-nothing Chaos humor in the 70's. Blah blah blah. Zzzzzz..... He's a dork. But - I digress from the original topic - Anyway, now those guys can say - "tomorrow I'll wake up and I'll be black but dude...you'll still be Michael Richards".

Ah, you don't know that Jonny. You're assuming that's what they want to do. They've got a high-profile lawyer who's going to get a sack of money for them and that's what they're in it for, right? If those two kids were my boys or if my children had been treated in a comparable manner, I'd be coming down on Richards like an iceberg on the Titanic. He thinks he's funny? I'd love to explore the limits of that with him and come out the better for it hopefully. We'd find out, for sure. He can keep his money - we'd want to go deeper than that. Racial hatred like Richards exhibited - whether part of an 'act', or a just a nutty temper gone out of control - is nasty stuff. And to me - the fact that others do similar things whether white, black or blue and 'get away with it', doesn't make it right. Feeding it contributes to it, keeps it alive. Humor is one way of bringing out things that are often too difficult to nail down openly. If it leads to discourse, debate, learning, improvement, it can be a good thing. Somewhere there's a balance and it's going to swing up and down. You can always tell though when something's funny - people laugh.

I hope the Richards meets with them, he owes them that. He's already proven he has nads the size of B-B's. He could be an adult and deal with it face to face. Money? Dunno, I'm constantly shocked at how litigious and suit-happy America has become, but I also recognize it's not for me to determine what these two men experienced, or whether they were hurt or not. To be the focal point of what was at the very least a verbal barrage of extreme rascially pointed hateful statements, to be reminded of how people of their 'color' were killed for little more than angering a white person - that's 'could' be difficult to handle, to say the least. If it had been a Way BOT onstage, acting as the figure of authority and verbally attacking homosexuals, other races, women or men or some of us here as we know has happened, it wouldn't be that different. Words hurt people. This board has participants that can testify to that. Some things are legal to do that are still wrong, that's my take. Not having a law against something doesn't mean that doing that thing is empty of effect or ramification. I'll be interested in what happens with this. I think a little ol' common sense justice would do. The judge could just hand the two guys a fork and say "you guys work it out, out back. See you in an hour". These guys seem to cool for anything like that though, so I doubt they'd go for it. Never know though. One can hope.

:)

Yes! Yes! Tom! Let freedom ring in the mouths of those who know. We know!!! You know we know....!!! Speak of all things Amazing!!!! I wonder what led that poor soul to his current deluded state. It inspires a sad sympathy. Perhaps he too at one time drank at the fount of Amazement!!! yet was taken against his will by the Evil Dark Monkey!!! Surely no one who once knew, really knew....would go willingly!!! Damm you Dark Monkey!!! Damm you!!!! This will not stand!!!!

I wonder if Wishbone Ash gigs on Thanksgiving? May a gentle snow blow the BlueBird of Happiness your way Ala! polar bear, that's a sweet tune. Here's a snip of a version by the Tempations, which may not be what you're looking for but it's an interesting take on that tune - How Sweet It Is - the Temptations I listened to a few different versions to get a feel for it - the Marvin Gaye original, and a couple of Taylors takes, live and the studio version. One thought - try it in the second position, using the C on the 5th fret, and play the E/3rd in the bass, up on the 7th fret. Play the other chords in and around that 5th - 7th frets, the F, Dminor, Eminor etc. You can do a lot of chord movement in that area without much movement, if you want to get kind of a Curtis Mayfield rhythm going. Listened to a version by Junior Walker too, a live cut, much faster version. That made me hear a Chuck Berry possibility, doing the C, etc. up around the 8th fret and play the chords in a lower bass "Berry" rhythm feel with the guitar parts. Just some possibilities... :)

Lies! All lies!!! Amazing Sea Monkeys harm NO one. They help, bringing happiness and joy to all!! Note this small, but glaring error - Most at home? To live!! they must be in water!!! I need only reference the poem discovered by Dr. Floatillus during his early Saharan digs, now widely attributed to an early settlement of Amazing Sea Monkeys that left eggs there for safety! Though written in a prehistoric age when dinosaurs populated the earth, it speaks to us yet - even today!!! "The life is in the water. The water is life. By the water I am all things, I know all things, I see all things. The water is life. The life is in the water." Truths that even the smallest of children know when they unpack their first envelope of Amazing Sea Monkeys and join the ancients in these holy traditions! No water, no life! for the Amazing Sea Monkeys!!!! HAHAHAHa!!!! We know who's behind this and thankfully Brother Lingo has opened the window to let the light shine!!! Evil Dark Monkey!!!! You lose....again!!! Obviously, steps must be taken. We have to take steps....

It's true. Restaurants are the worst. Ever sit down at a retaurant and innocently grab the napkin and put it on your lap, and use the silverware without a thought? Or see a table get quickly wiped clean after 4 Flu-infested sneezy snorters just vacated it. "We can seat you now". Uh... Casual restaurants - Catsup containers and any condiment with a screw-on cap or lid are the worst. I once saw a table where the little kid poked his finger into the Catsup bottle over and over, among other things. When they left the Mom cleaned his fingers off, and the waitress put the cap back on the bottle and reset. :blink: I don't carry a purse but I try to keep things off the floors in rest rooms and use the hanger on the back of the door for anything I can hang, although that's marginal at best. Scarey places, bathrooms.

Richards sounds at first like he is actually doing an "act" and taking the part of a racial bigot to respond to those men. Bad taste, but not unusual for comedy. It seems obvious he spun off into a personal response to what was being said, displaying then incredibly bad taste - "ugly" for want of a better word. It was wrong IMO. Is it illegal? In and of itself, no. I think of a driving speed - if the law states a street has a limit of 25 mph, and I drive 50 on it, I broke the law because that law regulates the speed, not the conditions on the road or whether it seemed safe at the time. What he did in his act would be the same if there was a law against what he did but I don't know of any. As far as damages go though, there could be damages proven. Just like the speeding law, even if I drive the speed limit, if I hit someone with my car I "break" another law. Richards may have been within his rights of speech, but I think if he caused other damage while using them he would be liable for them. As an entertainer in control of the stage, it was up to him to direct his comments and be responsible for them. No one else was in control of what he said or did. He got what he earned - scorn, rejection and disgust. And he showed he doesn't understand freedom of speech when he references "the words, we still have those words" and sounds like he's trying to channel Lenny Bruce and George Carlin, as if to say that calling a person a *n* is the same as saying "*f* that!" In context, he wasn't talking about saying them, he was saying them to another person in the way they would be at their most offensive. To me it perfecltly illustrates, yah, you can say anything you want to, if it's for shock value don't be surprised if people are shocked. You may have to explain yourself while running. He was free to say what he wanted for whatever reasons and now he's getting the results of that. I don't know whether a suit is legal or not but I think the idea that the men would respond in that way isn't out of the question or unreasonable. Richards is a well known public figure, a "TV star". He apologized on TV to "the world", but apparently not to the men. He could have easily set up arrangements to have gotten with them and dealt with it directly. What he did do is stupid and makes him look like he cares about his image to the world more than on what he did. - Come to think of it, the *n* word isn't maybe even the correct focus. He "Joked" that if it was 50 years ago those guys would be strung upside down with a fork up their a-s. Presumably for being disrespectful to a "white" comedian. Shoot, he's lucky those guys are as civil as they are, a suit would be preferable to other options they had available. Yeah, George, I'm of the same mind - Seinfeld had it's funny moments but it was a creepy show a lot of the time. Seinfeld's aim of a show with "no learning" was well served.

Happy Thanksgiving, Livers of the the Light! May your livers fare better today than the average turkey! I understand that ASM's are actually vegetarians, but in fact do eat a rare and microscopic form of algae known as "fowliage"!!! They gobble it up like crazy!!!!! Iti's true! It's amazing !!

Likewise and ditto ChattyKathy~ Happy Thanksgiving everyone! It's clear and sunny on the Left Coast, although they report snow in the higher 'tudes. We're staying local, with a visit or two in the day planned, so that's okay by me! Love y'all!

Hi waysider, I checked out one tune I found, "I Believe I'll Give It Up", very nice. He does have a real straight forward style, and great tone. I like it, nice to get hipped to more new music. :) His playing is a reminder of how much good stuff there is to play that doesn't get played much anymore. And you can hear the tone of his guitar, a hollow body electric, different than the solid body Fender sound in blues. Nice stuff. His playing reminds me of a guy out here in Northern California named Paul Wood, in approach if not sound, who's been doing blues since he was a teenager. I knew him back in high school and we jammed a few times, never got together though. He's been at it for years and doing it well. Paul Wood I keep thinking I'll catch up to him at some point. Thanks for the music, A la. That is a great tune, isn't it? Mayer is a true SRV fan, by his own admission his inspiration. And Vaughn was heavily influenced by Hendrix of course. So you have a straight line from Hendrix to Mayer. Which explains why Mayer's sought out Buddy Guy, as Guy was an influence of Hendrix's. :) The English style of 60's blues was very diverse, but you could argue breaking it out to two sounds - the Gibson sound and the Fender Telecaster. The Fender Stratocaster wasn't quite as popular amongst the early blues guitarists in England in the 60's, till Hendrix hit. Strat's were always associated with clean sounds, rhythm instruments. Which made it an ideal guitar for Hendrix's chordal style of rock-blues, all the little melodic things he played with chords, even in his heaviest sound. The Gibsons - SG, Les Paul, 335's were all popular guitars at that time and had a thicker sound, more fluid. The pickups are easier to manipulate that kind of sound out of them, and players like Clapton innovated the sound of players like BB and Freddie, Albert, Hubert Sumlin and others into a more fluid 'legato' style of playing blues. That became a very popular sound, and a lot of guitarists took to it. Same time other guitarists, notably Jeff Beck, used the Telecaster and grabbed sounds out of it that were sharper, with more bite. Beck switched to a Les Paul after awhile when he went solo and quickly turned to the Stratocaster, which is still his main guitar today. In the middle of this Hendrix pretty much blew a hole through it all and showed up with a Strat. The ideal r and b rhythm guitar, good for rock, soul, blues, you name it. Beat the hell out of it, it still plays. And it has a very characterstic sound, a quality that always speaks for itself, so to speak, regardless of what you do with it. It allowed Henderix to maintain some tonal integrity even at the extremely high volumes he played at. A Strat played loud still sounds like a Strat in other words, but loud. :) And there's a lot of resonance in the guitar's construction, a lot of sound he got out of it by playing it different ways. One of the things that Vaughn did in playing a Strat and grabbing a lot of Hendrix's sound and style was move decisively away from the fluid legato Gibsonn style of English blues ala Clapton and build on a strong, resonant blues-rock sound with the Strat more like the southern player Albert Collins, Albert King, and others. There's no arguing that Clapton's sound shaped the future of rock and blues guitar tone and style. But when you hear Hendrix, you hear another voice, as I think you do with Vaughn and now Mayer. Mayer's made a deliberate choice of instrument and influence. In there you can definitely hear a lot of different styles and he moves amongst them at will. Pretty soon I would think we'll hear more stuff like "Belief" and "Good Love Is on the Way", where the style isn't directly from these other guys and is more him. He's got the time, and the audience to support it. :) And I'd miss a chunk of funk if I didn't put Michael Bloomfield in here, as he was a rock then a blues player who went from a Fender Telecaster to a Gibson Les Paul as his instruments of choice. His voice was a really unique one, based on all the early electric blues players but much more energetic and emotional. He'd be more in the vein of a Vaughn to me, in energy in that he was dead-on from the get go and constantly full of ideas. He wasn't nearly as diverse as Hendrix but he stood out on his own during this period. When he really got control of the Les Paul he was a master of working tone and nuance out of it using exceptional technique, almost like it was wired to his heart through his head. He wasn't really advanced musically (although in his day he broke ground) but he was way off the chart developing his own style of electric blues. For me, he was an inspiration in many ways, good and bad. But his playing was killah, no matter what else he did around it. Eventually his lifestyle got the best of him though, sadly. Players like Sean Carney are kind of unique I think because they're not going in any of those directions really. His sounds connects more directly to the earlier players I think, and would mix right in with the 40's and 50's blues and rock as it was played. It's cool.

Mojave Desert, 1970, views for days of meteors. Love 'em. If my cell phone starts acting weird, I'll know why. :unsure:

--------------- chirp ...........................................................chirp Look! In the sky, so many stars. Stars.......Yeah. I killed it. Sorry. ------------------------ribbet So how's about dem Bears? DA Bears.

Ah, now we're gettin' it. Some Tommy Tucker, High Heeled Sneakers First song I learned all the guitar parts on. I was only about 11 or so, had barely a feel for how the blues progression worked, but managed to figure it out. I was all over the neck, didn't know the C positions at the time. Cool tune.

Okay Garth. You know I love ya, not that there's much currency in that, but with a litle change we can get a couple packs of Beebo's Nutty Bumpers and get sugared up! Your other points, I can't really comment on, so I'm trying to dazzle with dishpit. I'm not a creationist if that means that the earth is only a few thousand years old, period. I don't think that's what the bible really says, but frankly I don't think the bible really addresses topics like that. If it did, it should have an index and at least a table of contents. It doesn't. Seriously, I think my main challenge over the years has been coming to an understanding on what it does speak to and where it's true integrity lies. At the same time, I have a problem with a - call it, a non-intelligent design view of the universe. To me, there does seem to be design, although the intelligence of it doesn't completely compute to me in everything. I sense a purpose I don't completely understand. One of the pitfalls I think is to take the world as we see it and say "it doesn't make sense. Why is it like this? It could be much better if it was like THIS. Since it isn't like that, I can't believe there's a God or any kind of higher presence involved because it doesn't make sense to me that there's so many inconsistencies". You may not view it that way, but many do. What I think that does is create it's own gods. Gods who should do things the way we want them, the way we think would work best. When those self-created Higher Powers don't behave as projected, they're denied. If the god of my making can't do a better job than this, it must not exist. It's an odd way to look at life, to me. I've often wondered why the physical world seems to move the way it does. Granted, there's some serious zig-zags but our world seems to be waddling down a path that's too familiar to be completely spontaneous, IMO. F'instance movement. Things exist, and things that have life tend to have movement. Not always, but a lot of living things have self-generated movement. That movement's all the same kind - living things crawl, walk, step, swim, paddle, push, drag, float, pull, ooze, twist, sway. Movement and transportation is - it seems to be the same kind of thing regardless of the species. I wonder sometimes why alternate forms of transportation haven't evolved. I can imagine much more efficient means of moving from point A to point B but have never seen them or read about them. In the vast world of endless universal possiblities, there seems to have been only one that we see or have ever seen. There could possibly be a design, direction, purpose behind that. ???

Garth, I've got a couple things to contribute, just to show my heart's right. Soon as I get krysilis's Ptery-dactol under control. ( ....the droppings....the droppings....!) Perhaps a restating of part of the section of PFAL under scrutiny (....or...is it?) is in order. Herewith, to wit - Genesis 1:11 And God said, let the earth bring forth grass, the earth yielding seed and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. Verse 11 divulges many interesting truths. First, note that it says all are to bring forth after their kind. "Kind" is the world genos in the Septuagint, transliterated into English as "genus". This means that when a cow is bred to a bull, a calf will be the results, not a lamb. A dog and a cow cannot breed and get a cow-dog, nor will a cat and a dog produce a catty-dog or a doggy-cat. Why? Because everything comes after it's kind, after it's genus. There can be evolution or change within a genus but not between genera. Variety occurs within a genus. For example, there are big cows and small cows, black red and white cows;variety has occured within the bovine genus, but this genus has not crossed with another genus, or Genesis 1:11 would not be true. Whew. Okay. I wanted to copy/paste Mendel's 1st and 2nd Laws, but it's too much work. Old guy here, and I'm not a scientist or biologist. I'm a sockist, and I'm socked out. Catty-dogs aside, I would state this, just so I make a material contribution here and at least act like I'm fighting my weight: I see a simple logic in "everything after it's own kind". Day after day, cats have cats. Cows have cows. Every now and than a human has a cow over something, but they get over it. For the most part though, pretty much all the time, things follow that path. I also see a simple possibility in that - and this is pretty soft so feel free to beat it to a pulp - namely that anything that could happen, will or might happen, anytime. (Italics add weight, don't you think?) I have no problem and wouldn't dash my bible to the ground in disgust if a Brazilan cat had puppies. Or something that vaguely resembled a barker. I'd feel kinda bad for the little guys if they were unsuited for real-life survival but if they were raised as cats, what's that really mean? Cats sleep 80% of their lives. It's not a difficult lifestyle, y'know? Nor would I get too distraught if guys in lab coats tweeze up a new blend of mouse. My only real concern would be - why mice? We've got enough mice. Mice up the ying yang. Maybe Bill Gates and some Korean geneticist will partner up to produce a race of humans with PC chips for brains that will work perfectly and with no sleep, except that every once in awhile they'll start stuttering uncontrollably and you'll have to bang them on the head and poke their ribs in sequential order to get them to stop. It could happen, y'know? Within the range of possiblities in the universe, if there's the slightest possibility that something could happen, it probably has or will. And that instance could have a big effect on other things, everything. Or nothing maybe. "after it's own kind" indicates a direction, to me, a path of natural order. Things happen outside the natural order sometimes. Look at us. Are we normal? Anyway, PFAL itself presents this in the context of 'how the Word interprets itself". VPW wasn't the first or the last person to teach that the bible has an organic structure that directs how it can be understood or that it offers insight into life. That's a gimme for most religions that use it. (I don't know all the ones that do, so that's a guess) He didn't suggest that the earth was just a few thousand years old, either. This stuff falls into the sections that taught God reformed the present day earth into what we have today after an initial effort was all but destroyed. How all of that actually happened - no idea. Some ideas, but nothing I'd bank my faith in God on. That actually plays in a different sandbox. But - maybe we're all the messed up offspring of the platypus. That would sort of boggle the mind.

IMO, it's all it warrants Garth. It's lame - this double-back technique you've used. The topic started out with the news story and your statement that it really turns PFAL and the Mendel's Law/Doggie-Cat part on it's head. You used a news story that's obviously undocumented and sounds like for sure there's a piece of toast somewhere in the story that's going to look like the Virgin Mary. You jumped to your conclusion knowing that it doesn't disprove Mendel's Law or anything close to that part in PFAL. You know that. Before any effort's expended on what it does/doesn't mean, it needs to 1) be determined if it's even true and 2) if it's true what it means, if anything. The incident in and of itself doesn't mean that the world needs to retool our understanding genetics. It might just mean that dog needs to learn that "no" means "NO". Come on. It happened in Brazil. Can you say "coffee-buzz"? If you wanted to make this your foundational proof for whatever it is you're proposing, you did so for the sole purpose of being able to say "if this is stupid, so is Creationist 'science - So there!". IMO, it's just lame and doesn't do you justice. M.O. Now, sorry, I gotta go. There's a dinosaur in the backyard doin' his business and I HATE that.