VTmotoMike08

I fixed that for you. FTR, I think the legal drinking age should be reduced to at least 18. Fair enough. I don't really want old people in my college bars and you don't want me in your bars anyway. So we can have the 21-30 year old bars and the >30 year old bars. More college girls for me that way

Who really wants 18 year olds in bars anyway? I like to avoid thier inmaturity. Of course, when I was 18 I thought it was pretty unfair that I wasn't allowed into bars too...

Woah, really? It would be cool to see a video of that in action if anyone has one. Is it really a huge round chute that like deploys off the tail or something? I can't imagine that it saves the plane from catastrophic damage, but it might save some damage to anything that it hits on the ground. Or am I completly misunderstanding this? Interesting to say the least.

I think the moral of the story could be better said as "Don't get a useless degree!" I think that it is indeed a waste of time and money to get most of the humanities degrees. I have a friend who just got a political science degree and while she dreamed of doing all this lofty campaign work, the reality is that she got denied a position as an administrative assistant. However, I think the author underestimates the value of a good education from a top school. If you want to learn from the best, you have to go to the best schools. The best schools, afterall, have the best professors and instructors. The best is generally not the cheapest, and it should not be. I have seen this first hand in my entry level engineering work. I came in with experiance from a nationally ranked engineering school and immediatly saw work and tasks that closely resembled what I learned in the classroom. My coworkers who came from junior colleges and less well known schools had never seen most of it before and required a lot more supervision to get their work done. Not surprisingly, I moved up in favor with my boss and in pay grade quicker than them. I got what I paid for with my degree. Sure, you could possibly learn what I did from reading the books on your own, but that would take a lot longer than recieving quality instruction from professionals with years of experiance. And most high level, high responsibility careers already have a certification system that works quite well. Doctors, lawyers, engineers, nurses, pilots, computer professionals, and most other professions already do a good job at self- regulation. Um, isn't that one of the biggest things employers look for? And it also says that you have learned a given amout of material. Perhaps more importantly, it shows that you have learned how to learn. Then he goes on to say how this really doesn't mean anything of value The higher education system is not broken. Don't fix it.

What's the CAPS handle?

Isn't this a repost? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3302063;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread And you posted there too.

Doh! http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/08/19/rogers.uk.plane.powerline.itn It's the first video in that series. Personally, I hope that couple is billed for the entire cost of their rescue plus a good bonus for the rescue workers who put their lives in serious danger to save them.

Add me to the list of those who would make it if we got notice far enough out to get the time off of work and if there was an awesome line up of jump aircraft!

Cops screwed up. And lied. Happens sometimes.

It could be done, but you must be very careful when flaring with the risers like that. Don't screw up, or this could happen: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2909720;#2909720 Read the post from [tdog], #15 in that thread. In that injury, it was a breakfire instead of a knot like you are suggesting, but it is still a loss of control on one side. His adivce is very relevant to your question. Edit: specifically, I am talking about the second to last paragraph in his post. Best to read the whole thread to get the whole picture.

Don't knock it until you've tried it! This is another reason that we need a mens only forum...

Of course we can all get along. As soon as you all start agreeing with me? See how simple that is!

Ya know, I'm gonna need a little more evidence if you want me to believe all that stuff Really, how do you do it? I know some people are good at searching the internet, but you really take it to a whole new level! Just how do you find all your sources anyway? Google? Tons of time spent surfing the web? I just gotta know... Really, thats awesome

Yup, it was "inherited" from a family member when he no longer wanted it. Free is always a good deal. Note that I did say my next one will be a lot more efficient.

>>But what your situation _will_ be is that you will eventually have to replace your A/C, your refrigerator and your SUV... Fair enough. Just as I have done an economic analysis of my transportation costs, I will also evaluate these costs. Overall, long term cheapest will still win though. I would pay more for an efficient fridge, etc only if it would pay for itself within it's lifetime. >>Not necessarily. One method the economy has of regulating itself is to self-destruct... Agreed. I guess the real question is "what is the mimimum amout of undiserables that I can put up with now to prevent this from happening in the future." It is a very interesting engineering economics question! >>Some people can think beyond their wallet. True, but we know from history that the most feasable way to get people to do something is to make it financially viable. This is why we give tax breaks on charity donations, but heavily tax tobacco purchases.

Yup, you are right. It would be nice if I could afford to buy all the newest technology, but that is not reality. If I had some spare cash laying around, I probably would buy the latest and great energy efficient products, but that is not my situation. Of course, I could make some adjustments to my lifestyle, but that is highly undiserable. I could quit skydiving, stop drinking beer and ride the bus to work (actually, I can't because it doesn't go near there) but I enjoy these things so I will continue to do them until I can no longer afford it. Fact is, for now, sustainability costs more. Economic forces will correct for this, either by lowering the cost of sustainables or raising the cost of conventionals. You have to make this stuff attractive if you want people to do it. People have never really bought anything just because it is the right thing to do.

Excellant post. I am sure that you already know this but here goes: It's worth noting that people will invest in alternative sources a lot more when the are financially attractive. For example, I will continue to drive my SUV until gas prices get so high that it the cost of my gas is exactly equal the cost of a new hybrid car payment plus the equivalent amout of gas to get the same miles. I have a spread sheet that shows my total cost of driving for different situations of gas prices, new car payments, insurance, monthly mileage and fuel efficiences. I'm not gonna buy a new car (and my next will almost certainly be a hybrid) until is makes my bottom line less expensive. With all other factors staying the same, gas would have to cost about $7.50/ gal for it to be worth it for me to buy a hybrid (I currently have a paid off SUV). I'm sure that time will come sooner rather than later Same with powering my house. I'm not gonna put a big solar panel on the roof until it is better for my bottom line. So yes... raise prices Then I will buy this stuff but I'm not gonna due it until its worth it. Obviously, I would rather see the cost of alternatives come down than see the cost of conventionals rise. Probably both will happen, but the real question is if that will be before or after it causes me significant financial hardship.

Now I'm kinda wishing that I had not put those last two choices in the poll so that we could see how people really felt.

I'm curious to know how you voted. Mind sharing? I know you're pretty pro-bama (and I am starting to be more so myself) but anti- tapping the SPR.

I'm not sure if you are talking about me or Obama? Sorry, can you explain? Yes, it is exactly that according to this pdf on his site: http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf It says: "With the goal of bringing down prices at the pump, he supports releasing light oil from the SPR now..." Don't speculators react to projected supply and demand? If new supply is introduced into the market, then we will have to buy less in the immediate future as our refineries are being temporarily filled with light oil from the SPR. And he mentioned no time frame for refilling it, so who knows when that would be. Regardless, I think it is pretty well established that releasing oil from the SPR would, indeed, bring down prices in the short term. Not sure that I follow this part. Yes, it was bought off the market, but its being sold back onto it so...?? Agreed. Increased production now defanitly has a place as part of a total energy plan.

I'm surprised there is not a thread on this already because it is already over a week old. http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSWAT00987320080804 Also on Obama's site: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy So, Obama wants to take some light crude out of the strategic petro reserve and eventually replace it with heavy crude. His claim seems to be that it would immediatly relieve some of the pain at the pump. I see a few issues with this: 1. See this thread: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3242029;page=unread#unread Taking oil from the strategic reserve to inject into the market to temporarily lower prices seems to be generally regarded as a bad idea by most thinking people. Where is the condemmnation from republicans (and even democrats) on this idea? It is pretty clear that this is a temporary stunt that will momentarily depress prices but lead to much higher prices in the long term. 2. Increased supply would, in theory, lead to increased demand. Americans have, in general, been driving less this summer due to high gas prices. If those prices go much further down, we would just start driving more again, driving demand right back up again and negating the increase in supply. Prices will rise again, and the strategic reserve will have less light crude in it to boot. Great. I have not done the math on this but I don't think its entirely necessary to assess the situation. 3. Wouldn't having heavy crude in the petro reserve be substantially less useful than light crude? From what I have read, we can't easily make gas out of it, and that is where the vast majority of people's energy woes lie. In Obama's energy plan (PDF on his site) he states that heavier crude is "more suited to our long term needs". I have seen nothing to indicate this would be true, and he offers nothing to back up this statement. My thoughts: this is a really bad idea! Obama is catering to the non-thinking middle class sheep who automatically hear "more oil on the market" and equate that with "cheaper gas" without thinking of the real consequences of such an action. Vote and discuss, and post what you think would happen if this idea comes to pass.

Threatned for their personal safety and threatned by the consequences of failure are generally two different things. If I pick the wrong valve for my waste water plant that I am working on, I feel threatned that bad things would happen to said plant- literally crap everywhere. And I would get in deep dookie with the state, licensing board, etc. I should not feel threatned that my boss would clock me over the head for it, which appears to be what is happening in the OP's case.

*sigh* http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=ground%20launching&sb=score&mh=25

I never did understand why people like the velocity sports (infinity) risers. Several who have advocated them on this thread have a lot more experience than me so I hope to learn something here. Infinity risers do have a good hard housing design, but the loop on the back for retaining the stowed brake line really does not work well. It is just a small loop of fabric. And for microline, it does not even hold it firmly in place. give the risers a good shake (any normal opening) and the stowed line falls right out! I am pretty sure that the stowed brake line has come out of the keeper on every jump I have ever done with infinity risers. I like my Javelin risers much better. The stowed brake line is secured by a firm elastic band that goes all the way around the riser. It has never come loose during opening, and even stays there after I pull the slider over my toggles. The hard housing design is different (I think the housing is plactic) but I bet it will still work as designed. After looking at some UPT risers, those seem to be the best on the market, IMO. They have Louie loops, hard housings, and the tru-lock toggle system for securing the stowed brake line. Thoughts?

Whatever floats your boat. Some people might appreciate your feel good version of spirituality, but the more rational are fine just dealing with the hard realities of life. Everytime some speaks something like "reality all around us that is purely consciousness and energy, but not physical" I roll my eyes. You are experianceing chemicals touching a certain part of your brain that produces the given response. Chemicals are generated in response to physical stimuli. The physical world is all there is! Then when we die, we become worm food. Thats all there is. Mostly aggree with your assessment of religion. And we could come together without religion or spirituality.