I have a feeling if Dave were an angle, he'd be over 90 degrees.

"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...
On 21-Oct-2004, Dave Hinz wrote:

Right, so because some unnamed elected official and some preacher said
it,

Uhh, no they did identify these fellows.

they speak for everyone you disagree with. Gotcha.

Say what?

Davey. boy - I posted that as a joke! You do know what a joke is,
don't you? No? Ok, next time you're at the mall, pull your
head outa yer ass long enough to buy a sense of humor.

Cheers,

Mike

On 21 Oct 2004 21:18:55 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:18:48 GMT, Michael Daly wrote:
On 21-Oct-2004, Dave Hinz wrote:

Right, so because some unnamed elected official and some preacher said
it,

Uhh, no they did identify these fellows.

And yet, you do not, and your "cite" is a vague recollection of an
unnamed article talking about unnamed folks.

Davey. boy - I posted that as a joke! You do know what a joke is,
don't you? No? Ok, next time you're at the mall, pull your
head outa yer ass long enough to buy a sense of humor.

See, it's so hard to tell when someone is just _acting_ like a clueless
liberal, and when someone is _being_ same.


although it's _obvious_ when someone is a self righteous
"conservative"

bridger remarks:


Davey. boy - I posted that as a joke! You do know what a joke is,
don't you? No? Ok, next time you're at the mall, pull your
head outa yer ass long enough to buy a sense of humor.

See, it's so hard to tell when someone is just _acting_ like a clueless
liberal, and when someone is _being_ same.


although it's _obvious_ when someone is a self righteous
"conservative"



Without a sense of humor, too. I'd miss his posts if you guys didn't quote him.
But I wouldn't miss them a whole lot.

Charlie Self
"When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not
hereditary." Thomas Paine

Unisaw A100 did say:

Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.


Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

UA100

I think you've got several here on the rec!

--
New project = new tool. Hard and fast rule.

Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.


Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

UA100

UA100 asks:

Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.


Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

Buckley. I always believed he felt the whole thing was a joke anyway...not the
conservative bit, but everything.

Charlie Self
"When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not
hereditary." Thomas Paine

Unisaw A100 writes:
Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.


Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

Colin Quinn (albeit his politics can be hard to figure out sometimes).


UA100

Get a grip. You're suggesting that Bush and Republicans think the
supply of oil is infinite due to some weird religious bent and that they
abjure conservation because it's unnecessary?

bob g.

And, don't be such a pussy. Provide a legit e-mail or at least one that
can be divined from what you do provide.

Michael Daly wrote:

On 21-Oct-2004, "Swingman" wrote:


don't quite grasp the economic meaning of the
phrase "dry hole".


Prolly, 'cause the ultra-right Christian republican has been
taught that all you got to do is drill a hole in the ground to
find oil. The almighty has provided all the oil mankind could
ever use, according to that crowd and there ain't no such thing
as a dry hole. Some of these idiots get elected.

Mike

Me!

rhg

Unisaw A100 wrote:

Charlie Self wrote:

Without a sense of humor, too.



Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

UA100

On 22 Oct 2004 00:07:34 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
calmly ranted:

UA100 asks:

Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.


Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

Buckley. I always believed he felt the whole thing was a joke anyway...not the
conservative bit, but everything.

I'm sure you're right, and I love ironic humor, too.

-----
= The wealth of reality, cannot be seen from your locality. =
http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

On 21-Oct-2004, Robert Galloway wrote:

Is there an infinite amount of oil on the planet?

How can there be an infinite amount of anything on a finite
planet? Well, besides stupidity.

Mike

On 21-Oct-2004, Robert Galloway wrote:

Get a grip. You're suggesting that Bush and Republicans think the
supply of oil is infinite due to some weird religious bent and that they
abjure conservation because it's unnecessary?

No, but _some_ republicans do and some believe there's unlimited oil for
other reasons (like T. Gold's claims). Others don't care about how much
oil there is as long as there's enough for their own lifetime (like
the head of Exxon). Others are only interested in money now and to hell
with the future, good, bad or otherwise. Greedy folks can find lots
of justifications for ignoring reality in the short run.

BTW - although the existance of such beliefs is real, I posted that as
a joke, which seems to have gone right over the heads of the right wingers.
They really gotta loosen up. Talk about getting a grip.

Provide a legit e-mail or at least one that
can be divined from what you do provide.

Why?

Ever since I changed email addresses and stopped using a real or parsable
addy on Usenet, the spam has _stopped_. I don't want it back. If
you desparately want to email me, combine my full name and send it to
magma point ca.

Mike

I use turps and candle wax mix. On my table saw and band saw. Haven't had
any rust yet. My work shop is just a roof and three sides, at times it gets
a bit damp in there.


"Leon" wrote in message
news

"RonB" wrote in message
news:jH8dd.5652$EZ.2170@okepread07...
Kinda Interesting:

I was unpacking my new Powermatic 54A Jointer yesterday evening and
noticed Powermatic's suggestion for table rust protection. Sprinkle
talcum powder on the table and rub it in with a blackboard eraser. They
say the fine powder fills pores in the metal and blocks moisture
intrusion. Should be done weekly.


Weekly? Sounds more like a minimum preventative method. IMHO there are
much better methods.

So, you'll accept "trends" and "suspicions" as science?

How about trendy conclusions from suspicious people?

I'd reevaluate, if I were you. Science is an investigative process which
does not assert, but assumes a fact until proven otherwise. The rest is pap
for the intellectually undeveloped.

"Robert Galloway" wrote in message
...
Guys, there two basically different kinds of scientific findings. One
kind looks at the past and draws conclusions. Workers in certain
industries died younger and in larger numbers than others. For example,
asbestos (or other) particles were found on the microscope in the
center of their malignant lesions. Cause and effect? Remains to be
proven, but looks suspicious. (In some cases proven beyond a doubt.)

Trends (look pretty certain but not proven) seem to be associated with
certain effects ( greenhouse gasses, ozone etc.) (Skin cancer, global
warming, etc.) No intelligent person ignores the finding of science.
If you want to do that, let's quit spending all the money we spend to
keep these scientist busy. When evaluating their findings and
predictions, you have to remember that 1. Scientists can have
non-scientific, political agendas and 2. Others with even greater
political agendas can use the results of science to bolster their
position.

(Scott Lurndal) wrote in message om...
(Fred the Red Shirt) writes:
"Maxprop" wrote in message link.net...

As you can imagine, the media ran with the story, creating
a minor furor. A few environmental organizations even asked Congress to
look into the matter.


That sounds like more UL to me. I've never seen even one story, let
alone one falling for the spoof, in any media.

Penn and Teller did this on their Showtime show (Bull***t). They
got people to sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide and had
several "spokespersons" for various enviro orgs endorsing their
efforts. Would have been funny, if it wasn't so tragic.


I have a videoclip in which Senator John McCain accuses Karl Rove of
dynamiting the Old Man in the Mountain in New Hampshire to revenge
Bush's loss in the year 2000 primary.

I'm sure that spokesmen for environmental organizations enjoy a good
joke as much as anyone else. Penn and Teller are famous.

They are also stage magicians, entertainers. Stage Magicians often
use shills. Nothing wrong with that, but it should not be confused
with reality.

So though I remain amused, I also remain unconvinced.

--

FF

"Michael Daly" wrote:

On 21-Oct-2004, Robert Galloway wrote:

Get a grip. You're suggesting that Bush and Republicans think the
supply of oil is infinite due to some weird religious bent and that they
abjure conservation because it's unnecessary?

No, but _some_ republicans do and some believe there's unlimited oil for
other reasons (like T. Gold's claims).
Probably true. And some Democrats believe that sitting in a
pyramid-shaped building will cure lung cancer, heart disease and AIDS.
But both of these statements (mine and yours) are too meaningless to
be worth stating.

Others don't care about how much
oil there is as long as there's enough for their own lifetime (like
the head of Exxon).
I know nothing about the head of Exxon's politics nor his views on
resource depletion. Where did you find this information, or did you
just imagine it?

Others are only interested in money now and to hell
with the future, good, bad or otherwise. Greedy folks can find lots
of justifications for ignoring reality in the short run.
Yep.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:03:46 -0500, Robert Galloway
wrote:

Prolly, 'cause the ultra-right Christian republican has been
taught that all you got to do is drill a hole in the ground to
find oil. The almighty has provided all the oil mankind could
ever use, according to that crowd and there ain't no such thing
as a dry hole. Some of these idiots get elected.


There are serious petroleum scientists who cite the association of
Helium with petroleum deposits as evidence that Petroleum, unlike coal,
is not a "Fossil Fuel" but has some other geologic source. No known
biological process generates Helium, but the Earth's core releases it as
its radioactive components decay.

Right now, we're using deposits that are reletively easy to find and
relatively easy to extract, so the idea of oil from a hole in a Swedish
volcano remains a curiosity. But it is under investigation.

"All the oil mankind can ever use" is a nonsequitor--at some point,
petroleum will become expensive enough that we stop using it and hence
we won't, strictly speaking "run out," so much as switch to
alternatives as they become available.

Woe betide all those highly skilled Diesel road sign maintainers now
that their jobs have been displaced by solar LED signs.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:28:54 -0400, George george@least wrote:
I have a feeling if Dave were an angle, he'd be over 90 degrees.

Right, so because I'm asking some guy who makes a vague bull****
statement to back it up with an actual cite or something, I'm being
obtuse. I see what your standards are.

By the way, are you the same guy who was posting as "Georeg" for a
while?

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:07:46 GMT, Michael Daly wrote:

No, but _some_ republicans do and some believe there's unlimited oil for
other reasons (like T. Gold's claims). Others don't care about how much
oil there is as long as there's enough for their own lifetime (like
the head of Exxon). Others are only interested in money now and to hell
with the future, good, bad or otherwise. Greedy folks can find lots
of justifications for ignoring reality in the short run.

None of this has anything to do with those people being Republicans,
and these alleged beliefs do not extend to all Republicans. There are
probably even Democrats who don't understand science, believe it or
not.

Hell, there are Democrats who don't even know what the word "ban" means -
they must not, since they claim that "We won't use federal money to fund
any NEW LINES of stem cell research" means "George Bush banned stem cell
research".

BTW - although the existance of such beliefs is real, I posted that as
a joke, which seems to have gone right over the heads of the right wingers.
They really gotta loosen up. Talk about getting a grip.

Provide a legit e-mail or at least one that
can be divined from what you do provide.

Why?

Because an anonymous coward's opinions are worth exactly nothing. You
can't back up your noise with any sort of facts, and you're hiding who
you are. Just noise in the background. If you cared about what you say,
you'd have the balls to back it up with who you are.

Ever since I changed email addresses and stopped using a real or parsable
addy on Usenet, the spam has _stopped_. I don't want it back.

So subscribe to a spam filtering service, or buy a program that does it,
or install SpamAssassin.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:40:19 GMT, Unisaw A100 wrote:
Charlie Self wrote:
Without a sense of humor, too.

Besides P.J. O'Rourke, can anyone name a right winger _with_
a sense of hoomer still intact?

I've got a great sense of humor, but when some leftist posts unsubstantiated
crap, I call him on it, and he says "Whoa, I was just kidding", I'm the
one accused of having a problem? With all due respect, bull****.

Dave Hinz wrote:


Provide a legit e-mail or at least one that
can be divined from what you do provide.

Why?

Because an anonymous coward's opinions are worth exactly nothing. You
can't back up your noise with any sort of facts, and you're hiding who
you are. Just noise in the background. If you cared about what you say,
you'd have the balls to back it up with who you are.

Ever since I changed email addresses and stopped using a real or parsable
addy on Usenet, the spam has _stopped_. I don't want it back.

So subscribe to a spam filtering service, or buy a program that does it,
or install SpamAssassin.

Dave, generally, I have agreed with your points in this "debate", but
here you are beating a dead horse. He provided the requested way to
contact him via email, in the portion of the post you did not quote.
Like him, I have recently changed emails, and while the bayesian
filter did a great job before, it is even better not to get any, so
that the annoying 1-2% doesn't slip through.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

On 22-Oct-2004, alexy wrote:

I know nothing about the head of Exxon's politics nor his views on
resource depletion. Where did you find this information, or did you
just imagine it?

I don't just read the headlines.

Mike

On 22-Oct-2004, Dave Hinz wrote:

Because an anonymous coward's opinions are worth exactly nothing. You
can't back up your noise with any sort of facts, and you're hiding who
you are. Just noise in the background. If you cared about what you say,
you'd have the balls to back it up with who you are.

I post under my real name. Exactly what is proved by using an email address?
I can fake an email address as easily as a name.

If you want the source of my info, go to the library and start sifting through
back issues of Time magazine. I have better things to do than try to appease
a suspicious jerk like you.

Cheers,
Mike

On 22-Oct-2004, Dave Hinz wrote:

None of this has anything to do with those people being Republicans,

If you're that cranky about someone making a joke at the expense
of Republicans, all I can say is grow up.

Cheers.

Mike

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:01:09 -0400, alexy wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote:

So subscribe to a spam filtering service, or buy a program that does it,
or install SpamAssassin.

Dave, generally, I have agreed with your points in this "debate", but
here you are beating a dead horse. He provided the requested way to
contact him via email, in the portion of the post you did not quote.
Like him, I have recently changed emails, and while the bayesian
filter did a great job before, it is even better not to get any, so
that the annoying 1-2% doesn't slip through.

Right, he did provide it after being asked, that's true. I am pointing
out that there are more effective ways to do it. zaep (from zaep.com)
is a challenge/response program that runs on Windows; a sender has to
do a one-time "Yes, I'm a real person" in order for their emails to get
through. 30 bucks or something, and unless your whitelisted people turn
into spammers, 100% effective. Spamcop.net, for 20 or 30 bucks a year,
is about 99% effective, does pop and imap, and webmail.

When someone is posting bull**** anonymously, and proposes that their reason
for being anonymous is for anti-spam, rather than because they just want to
make noise and not say who they are, that explaination is suspect at best.

Dave Hinz

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:08:42 GMT, Michael Daly wrote:

If you want the source of my info, go to the library and start sifting through
back issues of Time magazine. I have better things to do than try to appease
a suspicious jerk like you.

Great cite, Mike. Good to know you can back up your statements with
facts. Now we just have to work on the part about it being irrelevant to
anything at all.

On 22-Oct-2004, Dave Hinz wrote:

I've got a great sense of humor, but when some leftist posts unsubstantiated
crap, I call him on it, and he says "Whoa, I was just kidding", I'm the
one accused of having a problem? With all due respect, bull****.

Why do you assume I'm a leftist?

You're taking this all too seriously, dude. Take a downer.

Cheers,
Mike

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:03:33 GMT, Michael Daly wrote:
On 22-Oct-2004, alexy wrote:

I know nothing about the head of Exxon's politics nor his views on
resource depletion. Where did you find this information, or did you
just imagine it?

I don't just read the headlines.

Yeah, it's in some magazine article from a decade or so, go look for it
yourself because Mike is too busy.

(Fred the Red Shirt) writes:
(Scott Lurndal) wrote in message om...

They are also stage magicians, entertainers. Stage Magicians often
use shills. Nothing wrong with that, but it should not be confused
with reality.

However, their showtime show is _not_ about magic, and _is_
about reality. No shills. The idiots were all real people
(cherrypicked, perhaps, like Leno does, but real).

scott


So though I remain amused, I also remain unconvinced.

--

FF

Michael Daly wrote:

On 22-Oct-2004, alexy wrote:

I know nothing about the head of Exxon's politics nor his views on
resource depletion. Where did you find this information, or did you
just imagine it?

I don't just read the headlines.

Then you should be able to easily provide a link to the information
requested.

Mike

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Michael Daly" wrote:

On 22-Oct-2004, alexy wrote:

I know nothing about the head of Exxon's politics nor his views on
resource depletion. Where did you find this information, or did you
just imagine it?

I don't just read the headlines.

That's commendable. But the question still stands unanswered.

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

On 21 Oct 2004 21:18:55 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:


See, it's so hard to tell when someone is just _acting_ like a clueless
liberal, and when someone is _being_ same.

Slow down, fascist at work...

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 19:58:09 -0500, Robert Galloway
wrote:


Use your intellect to determine whether the findings support the
recommendations. Predictions of depletion of oil reserves were based on
what was known at the time (more or less). We discovered more oil, we
conserved. Is there an infinite amount of oil on the planet? Will some
finite additional amount be discovered? Will the canny human animal
find substitutes "just in time" to move foreword with civilization and a
comfortable existence without undue deprivation due to that expiration
of the petroleum supply? I'd bet on it!! Oil reserves cannot be
infinite by my limited perspective but I'm not on the doomsday
bandwagon. Mankind has been pretty clever in the past.


And in our present situation, one small part of said humankind,
not having enough oil of its own, sacrifices its 18 yr olds and a
whole bunch of ingrate "sand nggers" in order to assure a plentiful
supply to burn up in 5,000 lb vehicles and 12 ft "cathedral"
ceilings.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:39:04 GMT, "U-CDK_CHARLES\\Charles" "Charles
wrote:

There are serious petroleum scientists who cite the association of
Helium with petroleum deposits as evidence that Petroleum, unlike coal,
is not a "Fossil Fuel" but has some other geologic source

Scientist singular, not plural.

Fred Hoyle, and he was a Loon.

Does this count as the beginning of the end? I believe threads must end
after the first Nazi reference, do the Italians count?

"GregP" wrote in message
...
On 21 Oct 2004 21:18:55 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:


See, it's so hard to tell when someone is just _acting_ like a clueless
liberal, and when someone is _being_ same.

Slow down, fascist at work...

"Michael Daly" wrote in message ...
On 21-Oct-2004, "Swingman" wrote:

don't quite grasp the economic meaning of the
phrase "dry hole".

Prolly, 'cause the ultra-right Christian republican has been
taught that all you got to do is drill a hole in the ground to
find oil. The almighty has provided all the oil mankind could
ever use, according to that crowd and there ain't no such thing
as a dry hole. Some of these idiots get elected.

It all depends on how you look at it. I personally have never been involved
in drilling a "dry hole" ... they were all "geological successes, but a
hydrocarbon failures".

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/04/04

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:08:15 +0100, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:39:04 GMT, "U-CDK_CHARLES\\Charles" "Charles
wrote:

There are serious petroleum scientists who cite the association of
Helium with petroleum deposits as evidence that Petroleum, unlike coal,
is not a "Fossil Fuel" but has some other geologic source

Scientist singular, not plural. Fred Hoyle, and he was a Loon.

But he was a Republican, don't you see what that means, Andy?

Dave "Oh wait, Mike wazzizname was just _joking_" Hinz

Andy Dingley wrote:

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:39:04 GMT, "U-CDK_CHARLES\\Charles" "Charles
wrote:

There are serious petroleum scientists who cite the association of
Helium with petroleum deposits as evidence that Petroleum, unlike coal,
is not a "Fossil Fuel" but has some other geologic source

Scientist singular, not plural.

Fred Hoyle, and he was a Loon.

If you're talking about Fred Hoyle the astronomer, he was hardly a "loon".
And it is a reasonable question--where did the helium come from and why is
it in those deposits and no others?

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Alpha particle, produced by radioactive decay, electrified. Any where but
under a lot of cover, gone to space.

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...aParticle.html

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...

If you're talking about Fred Hoyle the astronomer, he was hardly a "loon".
And it is a reasonable question--where did the helium come from and why is
it in those deposits and no others?

(Scott Lurndal) wrote in message .com...
(Fred the Red Shirt) writes:
(Scott Lurndal) wrote in message om...

They are also stage magicians, entertainers. Stage Magicians often
use shills. Nothing wrong with that, but it should not be confused
with reality.

However, their showtime show is _not_ about magic, and _is_
about reality. No shills. The idiots were all real people
(cherrypicked, perhaps, like Leno does, but real).


I think you missed my point entirely.

The show is a show, it doesn't have to be about magic to take
advantage of traditional magic methods. Uri Gellar's shows
were not about magic either, that didn't stop him from using
traditional magic methods either. I tend to think that Penn
and Teller probably are more honest than Gellar but they are
still in it for the money.

Supposing Penn or Teller stops you in the street and asks you
to sign a petition to stop dihydrogen oxide. If you 'get it'
you probably also realize that you won't get on TV unless you
play along.

Faith healers work the same way.

--

FF