Leaderboard

"The problem with using the terms “hard” and “soft” is that they are often misinterpreted. “Hard” science is often misinterpreted to mean that the discipline is more difficult or that the methods are based on true scientific principles. This can make people believe that “soft” science is wishy-washy and ideological. The truth is that any scientific discipline, when practiced properly, is hard. The scientific method requires hypotheses that can be tested using proper control groups and carefully designed methods. The difference between a chemistry experiment and a human behavior experiment is that it is easy to put chemical mixtures into positive and negative control groups. It is not so easy to find human beings that conform to the design of the study. The bottom line is that to further any scientific discipline; hard or soft, it is critical that the scientist do her best to follow the scientific method. The most difficult part of any experiment is interpreting results. Confidence in conclusions depends on design study." ~Karen Reece, BS, MS, PhD Over the past two years, I too; have recently found myself in that situation and am only "walking" in the past three weeks. It has been a humbling experience fraught with frustrations and anger - at myself, at the world, etc. But, you probably know this. [EDIT] And it "woke" me to the plight of the handicapped. I used to think that I was being helpful by opening the door or offering to help in some way . . . What I never realized was that I was constantly reminding them that they are handicapped and that I was more fortunate. I'll let Oscar Pistorius, Ryan Raghoo and Sir Philip Craven share their thoughts with you on the matter. You asked for a couple of resources of whom I gave the original authors of CRT. You skimmed the attached article and found something to attack and support your ingrained thoughts on the subject and appear to have stopped there without reading more. Peek and You and I used to sit at the WFFC in the evenings and have long conversations about safety and the direction of skydiving at the end of the day. I remember you as being more receptive than rigid. I feel pretty safe in saying that you don't really want to learn more about CRT as much as you just want to argue by using references and talking points from those who support your position. And, you have a right to your opinion, so we'll just leave it there.

What, to you, Winsor, differentiates the “races” besides skin color, and sometimes distinctive facial features? And why, besides the social treatment, does it matter? If there is nothing of significance, then doesn’t that kind of mean that race is a social construct? And that therefore its social construction is worthy of study — especially since there’s a well-documented history of it’s being used in social and legal contexts? Wendy P.

It would seem there IS a process to report such occurrences other than throwing shit out on social media. </sarcasm>

Morning, Winsor The following is a good overview of what you seek: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/ Any of the authors listed in the article are worth reviewing - "The originators of CRT include Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Cheryl Harris, Richard Delgado, Patricia Williams, Gloria Ladson-Billings, Tara Yosso" with Derrick Bell and Richard Delgado being the key authors and beginnings of CRT. "Race, Racism and American Law" by Derrick Bell 1973 "Critical Race Theory: An Introduction" by Jean Stefancic and Richard Delgado was written in 1995, but not published until 2001. I believe both are available on Kindle if that's a preference. I choose good old fashioned hardcover books. Note: I studied TQM in grad school. My thesis was on it and I got to speak with Dr. Deming on more than one occasion before he passed. There's what he said TQM was and then there were those who turned it into profit. Like what I said earlier in this thread - most are talking about race relations. Bill is one of the few that get what CRT really is. Maybe he'll chime in with some additional authors to review. Be well.

Similar situation analyzed here (9 years ago): https://www.flyaerodyne.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TB_ReserveActivationEvaluation1112.pdf .

Agreed, the vector issue is different in a subtle way. And in these cases, the devil is in the details. As far as the Icon stuff going on here, with three newly-made accounts all offering unsubstantiated photo's/videos of icons not properly working, I'm smelling either a hidden agenda or a big pile of bullshit. Cough up the details, or get the f* out.

Well of course you are. It's another conservative/libertarian group telling you what it is and painting it in the worst possible light, as opposed to any actual teaching that's currently going on. It took a few seconds of skimming the page to pick up on the language chosen and then another couple of minutes checking the parent site and the other externally linked references to confirm this was the furthest thing from an objective observer. If CRT actually was what that website says it is, everyone here would be in agreement with you. But also if you spent half as much time writing your lengthy diatribes and put the balance into actually *researching* the topics you've chosen, you might have already seen that you are being led by the nose. In fairness though, I do genuinely appreciate that you finally provided some sources for examination.

I've been in that situation twice, with Stiletto load 1.4. Each time I left the tied off steering line in place. I did not cut it with a hook knife. It was easy for me to fly the canopy in a straight line on final, either low toggle pressure or I'm just in really good shape ( ) . The first time I used the good toggle and the rear riser on the tied off side to flare. I did a PLF after a <<firm>> landing. No injuries. I told my wife about it later and she told me what I should have done . . . . because yes, she is smarter than me. SECOND time I was dumb enough to end up in this predicament, I tried my wife's advice and grabbed the tied-off steering line ABOVE the knot on the keeper ring. When flaring, I used the toggle on the good side and the steering line itself on the bad side and had a nice standup landing. As far as cutting away at 9500', no, I wouldn't do that. I actually had a malfunction at 12,500 once, after a premature deployment, pilot chute caught in the steering lines, spinning and loaded at 1.5. I planned to chop at 2K, so I rode the malfunction, doing my best to keep in under control with opposite toggle. Somewhere around 9K the pilot chute cleared out of the steering lines and I had a good canopy and a normal landing. IF you had wanted to work on your canopy, hold the released steering toggle in your teeth while you work on the bad one. That should keep you flying level. As always, watch your altitude. For anyone with less than a C license, ignore that last sentence. Your mileage may vary.

It does not, nor did Joe claim it did. What he said was it showcases "all the lies that the Alt-Right are using to try to suppress CRT." Which it does admirably. Some examples: "Critical race theory has spread across the U.S. like—forgive the expression—a virus." And what do you do to a virus? " . . .beholds the astounding impunity with which it may run amok in the streets and burn police cars and shopping malls . . ." Equating CRT to rioting is like equating US independence to looting. (After all, Boston Tea Party - need any fool say more?) "All white people are racists. " - A favorite lie the right attributes to CRT. After all, if you are white, they hate you! As to the censorship itself I refer you to: "Republicans announce federal bills to 'restrict the spread' of critical race theory" https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/republicans-announce-federal-bills-restrict-spread-critical-race-theory-n1267161 Please tell us all how the government outlawing a field of study is just fine, but Facebook deleting posts that violate its Terms of Service is just like the Kristallnacht. I'm disappointed. You once seemed like a pretty free thinker, with your own opinions and viewpoints. It was interesting to hear what you had to say. It's sad to see you sucked into the partisan void of the dittoheads and right wing parrots; what comes out of your mouth these days has been predigested and fed to you by the right wing, and you present it without any additional critical thought.

It’s not about pro Trump and anti Trump. It’s about complicit vs not complicit. Jim Jordan is not just crazy, not just a proven liar on a wild scale, not just an enthusiastic pusher of wild election fraud fantasies, he was literally in the room where it happened when Trump and his team were formulating their ‘let’s get everyone riled up’ pre riot plans. It’s not even just about the bias - you can’t make an investigator out of someone who could easily be subpoenaed as a witness to the things being investigated, and everyone knows that. Putting him forward in the first place is pure Republican political theatre.

Thats a hesitation. A total is when nothing launches. Can't tell much since the video is from the front. From the side would be way more useful. A hesitation on the bench does not mean it will hesitate in freefall. Freefall is not static like laying on a bench is. If the jumper were to drop a shoulder should it happen in freefall (standard student training, yes?) the shifting of the container and additional airflow over the back will likely clear any hesitation. Just too many variables involved to be blaming the container without specifying exactly what caused the hesitation. Besides the fact that bench hesitations are not unusual on any container (per my master rigger husband with 6k repacks...). Is the closing loop the correct length? One that is too long could cause a hesitation. Are the canopies correctly sized for the container? Over or understuffing can create these sort of issues. More details and a video that actually shows something useful are needed if you are going to attempt to damn the container manufacturer for something that may not be a container issue. Especially on the internet... using a click bait title... in a forum frequented by noobs...

OMG. Diesels are NOT STOCHIOMETRIC. That's why they are diesels. In fact that's pretty much the definition. They are not like gas engines, which maintain stochiometric combustion. You're like the whuffo bragging about how much you know about skydiving by dropping words you overheard. "Yeah, I'm going to start skydiving and get the biggest 3-ring you ever saw so I can land at 100mph!"

You landed safely, so, you did the right thing :-)