I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Not every rock. The rocks that burn are called "coal."

They light fairly easily with charcoal lighter fluid.

wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

They use anti-matter.

--
LSMFT

I haven't spoken to my wife in 18 months.
I don't like to interrupt her.

On Jul 9, 1:05*am, wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *Thats the part I cant figure out.

I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I would be happy to sell you, too.

Typically found in new construction churches. They don't burn, they
cleft. Actually, they sing about it "Rock of ages.... cleft for
me....."

They used to have these back in the fifties. "Rock, rock, rock, around
the clock tonight..."

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


wrote in message
...
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

wrote in message
...
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Try burning some Mormons, they're pretty dense, so they last.

Italians are better, all that grease and oil.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Smarty" wrote in message
...

Try burning some Mormons, they're pretty dense, so they last.

On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

On 7/10/2010 12:01 AM, cjt wrote:
Molly Brown wrote:
On Jul 8, 11:05 pm, wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Isn't coal a rock?

Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.

TDD

On 7/9/2010 9:15 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 7/10/2010 12:01 AM, cjt wrote:

Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05 pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Isn't coal a rock?

Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.

Are they flammable? Does your head ever burst into flames?


--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.

- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)

On 7/9/2010 11:20 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 7/9/2010 9:15 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 7/10/2010 12:01 AM, cjt wrote:

Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05 pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Isn't coal a rock?

Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.

Are they flammable? Does your head ever burst into flames?



Only when I talk/listen to Liberal Marxist Commiecrats. 8-)

TDD

Molly Brown wrote:
On Jul 8, 11:05 pm, wrote:
I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Isn't coal a rock?

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.

Are they flammable? Does your head ever burst into flames?



Only when I talk/listen to Liberal Marxist Commiecrats. 8-)


Hence the designation: "Flaming liberal."

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 7/9/2010 9:15 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 7/10/2010 12:01 AM, cjt wrote:

Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05 pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Isn't coal a rock?

Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.

Are they flammable? Does your head ever burst into flames?


I've sometimes wished I could make bad drivers burst into flames.

HeyBub wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Mt dad always told me I had rocks in my head.
Are they flammable? Does your head ever burst into flames?


Only when I talk/listen to Liberal Marxist Commiecrats. 8-)


Hence the designation: "Flaming liberal."


But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into flames,
so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming conservative."

On Jul 10, 4:31*am, Molly Brown wrote:
On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *Thats the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Afraid not. Rocks are already burnt. Millions of years ago in a
nuclear furnace some of them. You could melt them maybe.

On Jul 9, 11:50*pm, "Smarty" wrote:
wrote in message

...

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *Thats the part I cant figure out.

Try burning some Mormons, they're pretty dense, so they last.

OK folks. Here's how you burn a Mormon :-0 Or an Italian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontan...man_combustion

On Jul 11, 5:22*am, harry wrote:
On Jul 10, 4:31*am, Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *That's the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Afraid not. *Rocks are already burnt. Millions of years ago in a
nuclear furnace some of them. *You could melt them maybe.

Troll!
Just think of the amount of energy that would have to be used to melt
a rock.
Where would it come from?
Burning other material, or using electricity to create an arc. Costly
eh?
Now if one lived on the edge of a volcano in say, Iceland, and it
doesn't kill you in the process, and you could get heat from the
melted rocks (lava) from that natural furnace, the earth's core, or
the hot water/steam produced thereby ................ well that'd be
free; sorta.

cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

On Jul 11, 12:25*pm, terry wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:22*am, harry wrote:

On Jul 10, 4:31*am, Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *That's the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Afraid not. *Rocks are already burnt. Millions of years ago in a
nuclear furnace some of them. *You could melt them maybe.

Troll!
Just think of the amount of energy that would have to be used to melt
a rock.
Where would it come from?
Burning other material, or using electricity to create an arc. Costly
eh?
Now if one lived on the edge of a volcano in say, Iceland, and it
doesn't kill you in the process, and you could get heat from the
melted rocks (lava) from that natural furnace, the earth's core, or
the hot water/steam produced thereby ................ well that'd be
free; sorta.

All the rocks on earth were once gas, then liquid and then finally
solid. (Igneous rocks ) When the earth developed an atmosphere the
eaffects of weather pulverised the igbneous rocks and formed
sedimentary rocks and also metamorphic rocks. Did you ever go to
school?
The onlt rock that burns (Not actually rock) are the fossil fuels
containing carbon (buried sunlight).
Rock is commonly melted to make mineral wool insulaltion and to
extract metals from ores.

On Jul 11, 12:25*pm, terry wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:22*am, harry wrote:

On Jul 10, 4:31*am, Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *That's the part I cant figure out.

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Afraid not. *Rocks are already burnt. Millions of years ago in a
nuclear furnace some of them. *You could melt them maybe.

Troll!
Just think of the amount of energy that would have to be used to melt
a rock.
Where would it come from?
Burning other material, or using electricity to create an arc. Costly
eh?
Now if one lived on the edge of a volcano in say, Iceland, and it
doesn't kill you in the process, and you could get heat from the
melted rocks (lava) from that natural furnace, the earth's core, or
the hot water/steam produced thereby ................ well that'd be
free; sorta.

All the rocks on earth were once gas, then liquid and then finally
solid. (Igneous rocks ) When the earth developed an atmosphere the
effects of weather pulverised the igneous rocks and formed
sedimentary rocks and also metamorphic rocks. Did you ever go to
school?
The only rock that burns (Not actually rock) are the fossil fuels
containing carbon (buried sunlight).
Rock is commonly melted to make mineral wool insulation and to
extract metals from ores.

On 7/11/2010 6:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!



There was a mini-riot in Oakland after the verdict was announced in
the trial of the police officer who shot a young Negro man in the
back. I don't quite understand why anyone would go around smashing
windows and setting fires when they don't like a particular sentence
handed down by a court of law. You burn down your own neighborhood
when you're upset about something? Perhaps we should build riot parks
where any group could burn down and tear up structures designed for
the purpose. I'm not sure if it should be operated as a theme park or
a game preserve.

TDD

HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!


A few seconds on Google yields a fairly recent example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_brothers_riot

On 7/11/2010 1:44 PM, cjt wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or
looted stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the
liberal folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

A few seconds on Google yields a fairly recent example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_brothers_riot

I didn't see anything about windows being smashed, burning cars or
buildings. There was also no mention of serious injuries. I do believe
it was more of an unruly protest than a riot.

TDD

On 7/11/2010 10:23 AM harry spake thus:

All the rocks on earth were once gas, then liquid and then finally
solid. (Igneous rocks ) When the earth developed an atmosphere the
effects of weather pulverised the igneous rocks and formed
sedimentary rocks and also metamorphic rocks. Did you ever go to
school?

By the way, Harry, do you realize that when you "edit" a post in Google
Groups, as you did here, that *both* of your posts actually show up on
Usenet, not just the "edited" one?

But of course you'd never know that if you only use Google Groups to
read this newsgroup.

Yet another reason to hate Google's brain-dead implementation of their
spam-portal web interface to Usenet ...


--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.

- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:43:29 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 7/11/2010 6:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!



There was a mini-riot in Oakland after the verdict was announced in
the trial of the police officer who shot a young Negro man in the
back. I don't quite understand why anyone would go around smashing
windows and setting fires when they don't like a particular sentence
handed down by a court of law. You burn down your own neighborhood
when you're upset about something? Perhaps we should build riot parks
where any group could burn down and tear up structures designed for
the purpose. I'm not sure if it should be operated as a theme park or
a game preserve.

Sometimes a guy just needs a new wide-screen TeeVee.

On 7/11/2010 6:34 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:43:29 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 7/11/2010 6:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!



There was a mini-riot in Oakland after the verdict was announced in
the trial of the police officer who shot a young Negro man in the
back. I don't quite understand why anyone would go around smashing
windows and setting fires when they don't like a particular sentence
handed down by a court of law. You burn down your own neighborhood
when you're upset about something? Perhaps we should build riot parks
where any group could burn down and tear up structures designed for
the purpose. I'm not sure if it should be operated as a theme park or
a game preserve.

Sometimes a guy just needs a new wide-screen TeeVee.

Yea, put it on pay per view.

TDD

In article ,
" wrote:

Sometimes a guy just needs a new wide-screen TeeVee.

I didn't - in spite of ample warnings by sociologists
from large Eastern Universities - foresee the need to have
27" flat-screen television sets available to every family in the
New Orleans city limits as soon as the electricity went out.
That one WAS my bad.

--Richard Galen at www.mullings.com

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

On Jul 11, 6:43*pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 7/11/2010 6:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:





cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

There was a mini-riot in Oakland after the verdict was announced in
the trial of the police officer who shot a young Negro man in the
back. I don't quite understand why anyone would go around smashing
windows and setting fires when they don't like a particular sentence
handed down by a court of law. You burn down your own neighborhood
when you're upset about something? Perhaps we should build riot parks
where any group could burn down and tear up structures designed for
the purpose. I'm not sure if it should be operated as a theme park or
a game preserve.

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They were indicating their displeasure, sometimes it's the only way
to get attention. They should have burned the judges house down.
The alternative is that things go on as before. Not always desireable.

On Jul 11, 10:07*pm, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 7/11/2010 10:23 AM harry spake thus:

All the rocks on earth were once gas, then liquid and then finally
solid. *(Igneous rocks ) *When the earth developed an atmosphere the
effects of weather pulverised the igneous rocks and formed
sedimentary rocks and also metamorphic rocks. *Did you ever go to
school?

By the way, Harry, do you realize that when you "edit" a post in Google
Groups, as you did here, that *both* of your posts actually show up on
Usenet, not just the "edited" one?

But of course you'd never know that if you only use Google Groups to
read this newsgroup.

Yet another reason to hate Google's brain-dead implementation of their
spam-portal web interface to Usenet ...

--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.

- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)

I did'nt edit it. I just pressed the reply button and typed away. :-)

On 7/12/2010 1:29 AM, harry wrote:
On Jul 11, 6:43 pm, The Daring
wrote:
On 7/11/2010 6:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:





cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or looted
stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the liberal
folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

There was a mini-riot in Oakland after the verdict was announced in
the trial of the police officer who shot a young Negro man in the
back. I don't quite understand why anyone would go around smashing
windows and setting fires when they don't like a particular sentence
handed down by a court of law. You burn down your own neighborhood
when you're upset about something? Perhaps we should build riot parks
where any group could burn down and tear up structures designed for
the purpose. I'm not sure if it should be operated as a theme park or
a game preserve.

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They were indicating their displeasure, sometimes it's the only way
to get attention. They should have burned the judges house down.
The alternative is that things go on as before. Not always desireable.

You may remember the O J Simpson murder trial some years ago when he
was acquitted of the murder charge, many Caucasians didn't like the
verdict by a jury of his peers but not one White person burned a car,
smashed windows or looted stores because of it. I can see it now,...
Beverly Hills burning after Whitey got upset with the verdict in the
O J Simpson trial. What a headline that would make. I don't know of
any White folks who burned down their own neighborhood to get attention,
it makes absolutely no sense to do something like that.

TDD

The Daring Dufas wrote:

You may remember the O J Simpson murder trial some years ago when he
was acquitted of the murder charge, many Caucasians didn't like the
verdict by a jury of his peers but not one White person burned a car,
smashed windows or looted stores because of it. I can see it now,...
Beverly Hills burning after Whitey got upset with the verdict in the
O J Simpson trial. What a headline that would make. I don't know of
any White folks who burned down their own neighborhood to get
attention, it makes absolutely no sense to do something like that.


They probably understood, with a shake of the head and a resigned sigh, that
the criminal justice system in Los Angeles was so incompetent it couldn't
even frame a guilty man.

cjt wrote:

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or
looted stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the
liberal folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!


A few seconds on Google yields a fairly recent example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_brothers_riot

"The Brooks Brothers riot is the term coined to describe the demonstration
at a meeting of election canvassers in Miami-Dade County, Florida on
November 19, 2000, during a recount of votes made during the 2000 United
States presidential election. The name refers to a traditional brand of
suits associated with conservative business dress... "

Heh! I saw that "riot" (or part of it) on TV.

The (Democratic) canvassers were about to certify the results and barred
observers/monitors/watchers from the room. The TV cameras shifted to the
hallway were thirty or so people with short hair, white shirts, and neckties
set up a ruckus. They held up their cell-phones and Mont Blanc pens in a
show of unified pique.

Several shots of the Democratic party factotums showed absolute PANIC on
their faces over the chanting going on out in the hall. There was
hand-wringing and chin-quivering. Some Negro officials turned a paler shade
from fear! The TV cameras politely declined to show those who wet their
pants. I thought I heard someone yell "Run for your lives!"

Fearing for their safety and with concern over the future of the planet, the
election officials quickly reversed their decision and allowed observers.

The folks in the hall quietly filed in, took their seats, and the official
canvass got under way.

I think maybe one pot plant was broken in the hall.

On Jul 12, 8:24*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 7/12/2010 1:29 AM, harry wrote:

..

You may remember the O J Simpson murder trial some years ago when he
was acquitted of the murder charge, many Caucasians didn't like the
verdict by a jury of his peers but not one White person burned a car,
smashed windows or looted stores because of it. I can see it now,...
Beverly Hills burning after Whitey got upset with the verdict in the
O J Simpson trial. What a headline that would make. I don't know of
any White folks who burned down their own neighborhood to get attention,
it makes absolutely no sense to do something like that.

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
We have had plenty of riots in the UK, not all black people. But
quite a few.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_Tax_Riots
And recently in Greece.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Greek_riots

However all the ones I could find in America were race riots. Mostly
about police brutality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_riots

On Jul 11, 1:23*pm, harry wrote:
On Jul 11, 12:25*pm, terry wrote:





On Jul 11, 5:22*am, harry wrote:

On Jul 10, 4:31*am, Molly Brown wrote:

On Jul 8, 11:05*pm, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. *Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. *That sounds like a cheap fuel. *Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? *That's the part I cant figure out..

Theoretically you could burn rocks if you could get the temperature
high enough as for example an electrical arc.

Afraid not. *Rocks are already burnt. Millions of years ago in a
nuclear furnace some of them. *You could melt them maybe.

Troll!
Just think of the amount of energy that would have to be used to melt
a rock.
Where would it come from?
Burning other material, or using electricity to create an arc. Costly
eh?
Now if one lived on the edge of a volcano in say, Iceland, and it
doesn't kill you in the process, and you could get heat from the
melted rocks (lava) from that natural furnace, the earth's core, or
the hot water/steam produced thereby ................ well that'd be
free; sorta.

All the rocks on earth were once gas, then liquid and then finally
solid. *(Igneous rocks ) *When the earth developed an atmosphere the
effects of weather pulverised the igneous rocks and formed
sedimentary rocks and also metamorphic rocks. *Did you ever go to
school?
The only rock that burns (Not actually rock) are the fossil fuels
containing carbon (buried sunlight).
Rock is commonly melted to make mineral wool insulation and to
extract metals from ores.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"The only rock that burns (Not actually rock) are the fossil fuels
containing carbon (buried sunlight). "

If I dig up the "buried sunlight" can I throw parties in my back yard
without using the deck lights?

I'm thinking that there would be less mosquitoes that way.

On 7/12/2010 11:51 AM DerbyDad03 spake thus:

"The only rock that burns (Not actually rock) are the fossil fuels
containing carbon (buried sunlight). "

If I dig up the "buried sunlight" can I throw parties in my back yard
without using the deck lights?

I'm thinking that there would be less mosquitoes that way.

Nah, that's what you want them citronella candles for.


--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.

- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)

If you look to the 19th century you can find instances of Irish and other
ethnic groups rioting in the USA.


--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or
looted stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the
liberal folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

And Timothy McVeigh was such a liberal!

Bob F wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
cjt wrote:
But in the example, it's the conservative whose head burst into
flames, so it should be "flame-inducing liberal" and "flaming
conservative."

Nah, conservatives don't get that excited. It's the liberals who lose
control over sports results or trial outcomes.

You ever heard of a conservative "riot"?

Has a conservative mob ever thrown Molotov cocktails at police or
looted stores? Especially over such trivial matters as a hurricane?

Consider the reaction to the anti-immigration law in Arizona. The law
doesn't even take effect until the end of the month but already the
liberal folks are getting so excited they're stabbing each other!

And Timothy McVeigh was such a liberal!

McVeigh didn't stab anybody.

On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 01:05:24 -0500, wrote:

I heard they just developed a new furnace that burns rocks. Just fill
it with rocks, chunks of concrete, gravel, or sand and it will burn
them and heat the average home on about a ton of rocks for an entire
winter. That sounds like a cheap fuel. Does anyone know how they
would get the rocks to burn? Thats the part I cant figure out.

I have a furnace that can use ANYTHING as fuel. OK, not ENTIRTELY
anything, it there are some exceptions like nuclear waste.

This furnace is only imaginary. You have to BELIEVE you're warm.