Southern_Man

These anachronisms are telling evidence that the Bible was written or edited long after the events it narrates and is not always reliable as verifiable history. This is in no way new or surprising. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Not ENTIRELY fair to blame his band of retards. They only continued the charade. It's a lot harder to unfuck something and especially when the original fuck-up has been obfuscated. He's not even trying. The continuance of the "security apparatus" is its many manifestations has been my largest disappointment in the Obama presidency. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I've made my own hammock and spent quite a bit of time researching options. I used and most sites seem to recommend spectra cord. Dacron is indeed stretchier and stretchy is not a good quality for suspending the hammock (gives too much sag). Also I personally attach the line to a carabiner, and then use webbing around the tree. The webbing is a little easier on the tree and a little easier setup, although people who are using their hammock for minimalist backpacking would probably want to go with the half-hitches solution (I would have to think hard whether a different knot would be better but half hitches should certainly work). "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

You know, like a freeflyer... "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Guessing tattoos, piercings, gauges, spiked or dyed hairstyle. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Elvis..... you will find hundreds of em. I'm hoping to avoid him.

There's not a real difference over here. You can get fired/sacked for no reason over here. Laid off is often a cop-out by management that has no real reason to justify firing you to HR, so they give you severance in exchange for an agreement not to sue the company. There is a difference if you need to rely on unemployment benefits to get you through a period w/ no work. If you are laid off due to lack of work you will qualify for those benefits. If you are fired for cause (e.g. poor attendance) then you will not qualify. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Yes, it does. Our system is so subject to error (by virtue of being filled with people) that if we have a death penalty then we are going to put innocent people to death. This is only the most recent example of that fallibility. Maybe you consider that acceptable... I've already said that I don't. What it means, is the burden of proof needs to be raised. It also means independent review of LE actions is necessary. The LE community howls whenever faced w/that, but too damned bad. If They weren't f'ing up. They wouldn't have brought it upon themselves. The burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." What do you propose to raise it to? DNA proof seems to be a good place to look. That, along w/systemic improvements I mentioned earlier. With all due respect, "beyond a reasonable doubt and with DNA" is not a legal standard. Remember the guilt/innocence phase of the trial is usually separate from the penalty phase, so any idea that there should be one standard of proof for guilt/innocence and another for the penalty phase, well I don't think that makes much sense. I am in favor of a much less abusive police force but the judiciary is already supposed to serve as an independent check and review of their actions. In this case, it worked, sort of, 22 years too late. At least they weren't dead when the mistakes were realized. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Yes, it does. Our system is so subject to error (by virtue of being filled with people) that if we have a death penalty then we are going to put innocent people to death. This is only the most recent example of that fallibility. Maybe you consider that acceptable... I've already said that I don't. What it means, is the burden of proof needs to be raised. It also means independent review of LE actions is necessary. The LE community howls whenever faced w/that, but too damned bad. If They weren't f'ing up. They wouldn't have brought it upon themselves. The burden of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt." What do you propose to raise it to? "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Yes, it does. Our system is so subject to error (by virtue of being filled with people) that if we have a death penalty then we are going to put innocent people to death. This is only the most recent example of that fallibility. Maybe you consider that acceptable... "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Right, which is why "creation scientists" is a total misnomer. It is not science in any way shape or form. Arguments that evolution or Big Bang theories are not complete or well supported give absolutely no validity to "creation science" theories, unless you accept that these are the only two possible explanations and therefore weaknesses in one automatically strengthen the other. Of course that is philosophically hogwash. And why Scientists should not be debating this with "creation scientists". Evolutionary theory and the big band are entirely different and separate subjects and I've never understood why they get lumped together. Neither one depends on the other to be true or well supported. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Just my experience but I have jumped at a variety of DZs and believe that there is quite a bit of difference at small DZs (where you know all the experienced jumpers personally) and large commerciaql DZs where there is quite a bit more anonymity. It is much easier to be an asshole at the larger places. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

If you were on the verge of convincing anybody that you had actual knowledge and experience of jumping this talk of "visitors procedures" has pretty much but the squash to that. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

From what I can tell I believe it would help with making it more water resistant but I don't believe Scotch-Guard provides any UV protection. I think the UV degradation would be at least as important in the degradation. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I've just bought a pair of pants, to fly with my camera jacket. May look like a dork, but better than board shorts for protection. I use MX pants for hop and pops. Great protection and I got mine on clearance for ~$50 or $60. Very durable. I have seen quite a lot of jumpers wearing them for that purpose at a number of different dropzones. Nobody has ever laughed at me or even given it a second thought except to say they thought it was very practical. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

The issue though is Act 3 of the book relies heavily on a person buying into the premise set up early in the first Act. If one admits Act 1 is mythology, then one also has to accept Act 3 is a myth as well, but that's not what is being sold. Yes, which is exactly why scientists should not engage in this sort of public debate. It is not a debate between two scientific theories. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

This idea has been tried before. It would require wide-spread, almost industry wide adoption. Why invest in a transmitter if the receiver isn't going to be available when you travel? IMO, something that can be tracked with a smart phone or more portable device is going to work better. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

bah, I disagree. It is a very poor idea, in my opinion, to engage in this kind of debate. It feeds the false equivalence that these are two ideas competing in the same arena. They aren't. A lot of creationist logic is that these are the only two options and that consequently any weakness or lack of evidence in evolutionary theory is therefore automatically a gain of evidence for creationism. Christian creationism should be debating whether Genesis or the Rig Veda or the Ginnungagap of Norse mythology provide the most plausible account. I have no thought that these views should be suppressed, they just shouldn't be debated as scientific theories because they are not. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

It has happened before... "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

It all comes down to the price point. At the right price point I think it could have large interest but I think it is hard to design a device at that price point (along w/ the battery issue). "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

My uncle died from complications from Polio. He would have been born in the mid 40s (My dad was born in 1940 and it was his younger brother). He contracted Polio as a child. He spent a large part of his childhood in a Sanitarium where my dad and his parents and brother would go visit him ever few weeks. He had a severely deformed back and one arm that he only had minimal use of. He died at 42. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

I think the Postal Clause allows the postal service but I don't think it requires it. Anyway, the fundamental problem is that Congress wants them to balance their books and pay for themselves but won't allow them to change service, close branches, etc. as they need to in order to achieve that end. I lived in a small town (outpost?) with its own post office and church and no other businesses. Had a post office 4 miles in one direction and 6 in the other. The Postal service tried to close it and the people put up such a fuss that congress (or rather the congressman from that district) wouldnt' let them close it. Didn't run mail out of that office, just had a few P.O. Boxes and paid somebody 1/2 time to open the office. Huge waste of money. The people (all politically conservative) were proud that they had fought the closing and won. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

It has been a while since I opened a new one but last time I investigated it seemed a lot of places were willing to open one with a pretty minimal amount if there was an automatic draft in place. "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

No, the marital presumption would apply. It would also apply to the couple in Kansas if gay marriage was legal there (and they chose to get married). "What if there were no hypothetical questions?"