On 07 Mar 2004 15:51:45 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis carry --
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

dumb.

schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

dumb.

schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

On 07 Mar 2004 21:23:24 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

On 07 Mar 2004 21:23:24 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

schlackoff, you bring nothing of any value to any discussion. Not sure whether
you are too dumb not to sit in dog****, or you just like to.

btw, do you suppose the water taxi driver was told about the winds coming.
that's the news report, which may be wrong.

but schlackoff just wants to say the driver was totally unable to see what was
coming, thus excusing schlackoff from seeing what's coming.

maybe schlackoff isn't dumb? maybe he is lazy?

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you
are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to
see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis
carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are
scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

schlackoff, you bring nothing of any value to any discussion. Not sure whether
you are too dumb not to sit in dog****, or you just like to.

btw, do you suppose the water taxi driver was told about the winds coming.
that's the news report, which may be wrong.

but schlackoff just wants to say the driver was totally unable to see what was
coming, thus excusing schlackoff from seeing what's coming.

maybe schlackoff isn't dumb? maybe he is lazy?

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you
are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to
see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis
carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are
scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

On 08 Mar 2004 01:47:23 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

schlackoff, you bring nothing of any value to any discussion. Not sure whether
you are too dumb not to sit in dog****, or you just like to.

Awe, you don't see how pointing out how you are always wrong is of
value? I guess not.

btw, do you suppose the water taxi driver was told about the winds coming.
that's the news report, which may be wrong.

The news report is that he was told 10 minutes before it hit him, which
was his warning time. That is something you said cannot happen, yet it
did.

but schlackoff just wants to say the driver was totally unable to see what was
coming, thus excusing schlackoff from seeing what's coming.

I'm just wondering if you actually believe that it's impossible for a
storm cell to form over a location near you and then move so fast that
that you only have 10 minutes of warning. Or do you think that cells
form out over the pacific ocean and march across the country to the
Chesapeake intact and easily seen for hours before they hit you.

I'm also left wondering if you think that in a metropolitan area like
Baltimore, that one has an unimpeded view of the horizon well enough to
see storm clouds hours before they hit if they actually did form far
enough away to give that much warning.

maybe schlackoff isn't dumb? maybe he is lazy?

We know you're dumb. Not sure about lazy, but definitely dumb.

Steve

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you
are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to
see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis
carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are
scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

On 08 Mar 2004 01:47:23 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

schlackoff, you bring nothing of any value to any discussion. Not sure whether
you are too dumb not to sit in dog****, or you just like to.

Awe, you don't see how pointing out how you are always wrong is of
value? I guess not.

btw, do you suppose the water taxi driver was told about the winds coming.
that's the news report, which may be wrong.

The news report is that he was told 10 minutes before it hit him, which
was his warning time. That is something you said cannot happen, yet it
did.

but schlackoff just wants to say the driver was totally unable to see what was
coming, thus excusing schlackoff from seeing what's coming.

I'm just wondering if you actually believe that it's impossible for a
storm cell to form over a location near you and then move so fast that
that you only have 10 minutes of warning. Or do you think that cells
form out over the pacific ocean and march across the country to the
Chesapeake intact and easily seen for hours before they hit you.

I'm also left wondering if you think that in a metropolitan area like
Baltimore, that one has an unimpeded view of the horizon well enough to
see storm clouds hours before they hit if they actually did form far
enough away to give that much warning.

maybe schlackoff isn't dumb? maybe he is lazy?

We know you're dumb. Not sure about lazy, but definitely dumb.

Steve

schlackoff, re-read what you wrote and be embarrassed for yourself, for you
are
unequivically stating that a.) the operator of the water taxi was unable to
see
the weather developing, and b.) a cell phone would have.

Seems like you can't even understand simple english. Nowhere did I say
anything about a cell phone. I'll say it again, your statement:

"jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest
of us know their potential exists for that particular day well before we
cast off, and we can see one developing for a couple hours or more."

has been proven to be wrong. Again, there's no mention of a cellphone
in your statement and I didn't say anything about a cellphone either.
The only thing I'm saying is that your statement above is wrong. That's
it, nothing more. Can you comprehend that?

Steve




schlackoff? Are you saying the CG should require that ALL water taxis
carry
--
and monitor -- a radar enabled cell phone?

Um, no. I'm saying that, as many have argued in the thread and as has
now been proven, your statement (quoted here again

jeff, ONLY a sailor of training wheels is totally oblivious to an
approaching
thunderstorm until 10 minutes before it arrives. The rest of us know
their
potential exists for that particular day well before we cast off, and we
can
see one developing for a couple hours or more. This ain't rocket
science,
except to those floating on training wheels (who be definition are
scared
squatless of the water).

is total BS.

Do suppose it might be more effective to require water taxi drivers to be
able
to understand weather?

Hey! Wait a minute! Water taxi drivers are required to be able to
understand
weather.

Understanding the weather wouldn't have mattered a whit in this case,
which is the point. There was a total of 10 minutes of warning for the
cell that hit the taxi. 10 minutes is nowhere near your claim of seeing
potential storms developing for hours or more. I.e, what happened is
exactly what you said can't happen. Your claim that "we can
see one developing for a couple hours or more" is now unequivocally
proven to be total BS, just as we all suspected.

Steve

schlackoff, it is a sad fact that you consume oxygen that might otherwise be
used by human beings.

Not sure about lazy, but definitely dumb.