| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#101
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Update on ecigs...
|
|
#103
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/28/12 7:27 AM, BAR wrote:
In , lid says... On 2/25/2012 10:44 AM, BAR wrote: There is nothing irrational about your fears, they are your fears and your fears alone. What you don't have is the right to foist your irrationality and fears upon the rest of society. You are free to live on your property and live your irrational and fear filled life all alone without interference from anyone. So you do understand my thoughts on religion. I don't think anyone understands you. Your mind is warped, your views are off the charts and you are generally an unpleasent person. Considering where certain people and a certain political party in the USA are trying to take religion, it is rational to believe that there is an effort to turn this country into a Christian version of an ayatollahville. |
|
#104
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
In article , dump-on-
says... On 2/27/12 8:24 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 2/26/12 10:25 PM, BAR wrote: In b.com, says... On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:20:09 -0500, wrote: In articlep_Kdnelbdrumw9fSnZ2dnUVZ_qKdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote: In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote: Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that shows that second hand smoke causes health problems? The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions, sub-standard methods and politically driven persons. What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate medical research? You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable qualifications. What are your qualifications to question anyone else's qualifications? He learned English real good in Kansas. That's gotta count fer sumpin. I am curious as to why the great Harry Krause went to a school out in the middle of nowhere. Couldn't he get into any of the local schools of higher learning? It is also interesting that he was only able to secure a job at a newspaper with little to no significance. Funny too that he never got another newspaper job. He did go into union organizing, not much needed there but the ability to rabble rouse. You should refocus your curiosity on the academic incompetence that kept you out of even an open enrollment two year community college. As for the Kansas City Star, when I worked there it was considered one of the 10 best newspapers in the United States. Some years later, the newsroom employees who owned the paper sold it off to a conglomerate and it began its downward slide, as virtually all formerly independent newspapers do once they are acquired. I never actually applied for a newspaper or news job anywhere. During a journalism honorary society induction ceremony in Kansas City sponsored by the Kansas City Star, at which everyone got roaring drunk, I was asked by the then managing editor of the morning edition if I wanted a summer job. I stopped by the paper the next day and the managing editor hired me on the spot, without an application or resume. Turns out one of my professors at school knew the managing editor and had recommended I be hired for the summer job. At the end of the summer, just before I started my senior year, the managing editor asked me if I thought I could finish up school and work on the paper. He got the city editor to jiggle schedules so I was able to take my remaining classes in the AM and through mid-day and drive my derelict car to the paper five late afternoons a week. After some years at the Kansas City, I was recruited by The Associated Press at the behest of Harry F. Rosenthal, a very well known senior AP reported and editor, and David Halberstam, an author. I was flown to New York and interviewed directly by Keith Fuller of the AP and Wes Gallagher, who at that time was the AP's general manager. While with the AP, I was promoted to Correspondent in Charge of smaller bureaus in three states, and covered first-hand two horrific disasters, one involving a bridge and the other a huge coal mine explosion. On the basis of that work, I was invited to New York again and offered a TV news job at ABC News. I wasn't that interested, but I did get to meet Jimmy Breslin at ABC. His last newspaper gig went down the drain with the collapse of the World Journal Tribune. Breslin took me to an "expensive" lunch at his favorite hot dog stand, where we became friends after both of us dripped mustard on our shirts. So, you see, I never sought a newspaper job, not my first one and not my last "news" job. I did OK in the news biz for a guy with a B.A. in English and an M.A. in English and, of course, along the way, I managed to take a number of university level science and math classes. But even with that formal education in my background, I don't feel comfortable predicting what the fuel will be for cars two decades from now. So, Bertie, have you ever taken and passed any university-level courses in math or science? Didn't think so. Why do you feel compelled to open up and explain your entire professional life to a guy on the Internet whom you have declared many times is an idiot and not worth your time. I am on schedule to retire in 8 years, prior to reaching the age of 60. Accomplished without a pension from any company or relying upon social security. I think I have done pretty well for myself. Pretty well for an uneducated former jar-head. Why? Because you make it so easy. I am glad you are comfortable enough with me to provide me with your life's history. |
|
#105
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
In article ,
says... On 2/28/12 7:24 AM, BAR wrote: In , dump-on- says... On 2/28/12 1:22 AM, wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:30:45 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/27/12 8:19 PM, wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:22:59 -0500, X ` Man Every majority that wants to discriminate against a minority has Peer Reviewed studies to prove they are right whether it is Goebbels, David Duke or Rick Santorum. When all of the "peers" are anti smoking groups it is not surprising that they come to the same conclusion about very low levels of second hand smoke. You think "peers" should be pro-smoking? No but they should be pro freedom. There are acceptable threshold limit values on every chemical in cigarette smoke but they do not apply if the source is cigarette smoke. GOOD. So you admit this is not science, tt is prejudice. Naw. I don't buy your argument so I'm just playing with the language. Cigarette smoke is not one of those trade-off thingies you like so much. It's like Hitler...there's no reason to compromise about it...it's all bad and *anything* that can be done to eliminate cigarettes is a good thing. The outlaw them completely. Why should people benefit from taxes on cigarettes. I would argue that it makes sense to continue to raise the taxes on cigarettes to the point where they are so expensive, the market for them collapses. Unfortunately, the tobacco companies are now concentrating selling their deadly wares to minors in third world countries. I'm sure at some point there will be a worldwide ban on the manufacture and sale of the damned things. Legal is legal. Besides tobacco built the USA. If there was no tobacco then we would have been just a very large lumber yard. |
|
#106
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
In article ,
says... On 2/28/12 7:27 AM, BAR wrote: In , lid says... On 2/25/2012 10:44 AM, BAR wrote: There is nothing irrational about your fears, they are your fears and your fears alone. What you don't have is the right to foist your irrationality and fears upon the rest of society. You are free to live on your property and live your irrational and fear filled life all alone without interference from anyone. So you do understand my thoughts on religion. I don't think anyone understands you. Your mind is warped, your views are off the charts and you are generally an unpleasent person. Considering where certain people and a certain political party in the USA are trying to take religion, it is rational to believe that there is an effort to turn this country into a Christian version of an ayatollahville. The interesting thing is that there is no specific language in the US Constitution that provides for the separation of church and state. That issue was left to the states to decide. But, the people's right to keep and bear arms was ensured by its language. Let's say Maryland was to return to its Catholic roots and it had a constitutional amendment that says Catholicism was the Maryland State religion. There would be nothing the Congress could do or that the SCOTUS could do to stop that. The first amendment says "Congress shall make no law..." |
|
#107
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
On 2/28/12 7:42 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 2/28/12 7:27 AM, BAR wrote: In , lid says... On 2/25/2012 10:44 AM, BAR wrote: There is nothing irrational about your fears, they are your fears and your fears alone. What you don't have is the right to foist your irrationality and fears upon the rest of society. You are free to live on your property and live your irrational and fear filled life all alone without interference from anyone. So you do understand my thoughts on religion. I don't think anyone understands you. Your mind is warped, your views are off the charts and you are generally an unpleasent person. Considering where certain people and a certain political party in the USA are trying to take religion, it is rational to believe that there is an effort to turn this country into a Christian version of an ayatollahville. The interesting thing is that there is no specific language in the US Constitution that provides for the separation of church and state. That issue was left to the states to decide. But, the people's right to keep and bear arms was ensured by its language. Let's say Maryland was to return to its Catholic roots and it had a constitutional amendment that says Catholicism was the Maryland State religion. There would be nothing the Congress could do or that the SCOTUS could do to stop that. The first amendment says "Congress shall make no law..." I wouldn't bet my retirement cache on the legal validity of *that* posit. The Supremes have ruled negatively on attempts by states to "establish" state religion or religious observance or practice. Still, there's time remaining in political selection process of the pro-superstition party. Maybe Monsieur Rick will try to promote his brand of religion as a required national religion. He's become the "laugh a day" guy. -- |
|
#108
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
|
|
#109
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
In article ,
says... On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:22:59 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 2/27/12 4:16 PM, wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 08:54:41 -0500, wrote: Did you and Scotty see the "peer reviewed" studies I posted? You haven't responded.... odd.... Every majority that wants to discriminate against a minority has Peer Reviewed studies to prove they are right whether it is Goebbels, David Duke or Rick Santorum. When all of the "peers" are anti smoking groups it is not surprising that they come to the same conclusion about very low levels of second hand smoke. You think "peers" should be pro-smoking? No but they should be pro freedom. There are acceptable threshold limit values on every chemical in cigarette smoke but they do not apply if the source is cigarette smoke. I'm pro freedom. I've stated here in this thread many, many times. I don't care how much someone smokes. Get your kids to smoke. Take them to the smoking lounge at the airport, I don't care. BUT, smokers are DIRECTLY harming the health of innocent people. THAT is the problem. |
|
#110
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Update on ecigs...
In article , says...
On 2/27/2012 4:16 PM, wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 08:54:41 -0500, wrote: Did you and Scotty see the "peer reviewed" studies I posted? You haven't responded.... odd.... Did you know I don't see your posts, until somebody else snerks at them? Every majority that wants to discriminate against a minority has Peer Reviewed studies to prove they are right whether it is Goebbels, David Duke or Rick Santorum. When all of the "peers" are anti smoking groups it is not surprising that they come to the same conclusion about very low levels of second hand smoke. I guess that means that you read the peer reviewed studies and chose to not comment on them. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| update | Boat Building | |||
| GB update | General | |||
| "26 Again" update | ASA | |||
![BAR[_2_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
