The constitution was rotten.. really?
 

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

Doug here's some maths: 1988 is not 'less than ten years' after 1976


True, but you said 1983 to 1988.

I assume this is a backpedal?

.... I also did not say that the straps were in place in 1988!


So this is *definitely* a major backpedal.

You did in fact say so, I asked you specifically "when" and you said 83
to 88... want to check the Google archive? You can lie freely about many
things, but you cannot lie about what you have posted. At least, not and
get away with it.

I was answering your question about when I lived in Baltimore. So it was
not a lie was it? C'mon try again the record does not lie but you do
-frequently.

Navigator wrote:

83-88.

Cheers

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

I visited her quite often on my walks around her. There were
certainly no naval personnel there in my day.


When was this?

DSK


Cheers

Nav's Big Blunder
 

Navigator wrote:
Oh rats we were not talking about the same ship! My mistake.

To coin a phrase "I think an apology is in order"

Actually, paying off your mistaken bet would be even nicer, but we'll
take things one at a time. Rome wasn't built in a day and all that.

thanks in advance
Doug King

He didn't know what year it was either
 

The problem is that you can't follow a thread. Try rereading at a speed
that matches your wit. Asd for stability have you found out what the
metacentric height is yet? I've forgotten more than you will ever know!

Bhahahhahahahhaha

Cheers

DSK wrote:

Was it 1983? Was it 1988? Was it 1994?

It's all so confusing, especially to a man who has worked as a naval
architect's apprentice but cannot explain stability.

But I don't necessarily want to cause Navvie any anguish... I just want
him to stop lying & making up BS to sound important... or would that
take away what little he has in life?

DSK

Nav's Big Blunder
 

When will you agree to terms for settling the bet then?

Cheers

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

Oh rats we were not talking about the same ship! My mistake.


To coin a phrase "I think an apology is in order"

Actually, paying off your mistaken bet would be even nicer, but we'll
take things one at a time. Rome wasn't built in a day and all that.

thanks in advance
Doug King

Nav's Big Blunder
 

But at least I was not lying about it eh? :-)

Cheers

Jeff Morris wrote:

So I'm sitting in the dentist's chair this afternoon trying to will my mind as
far as possible from my body and I start contemplating Nav's old comments. They
just don't fit in with my recollections of the Constitution.

I don't recall any metal bands around her. She wasn't sinking. There were
always Navy personal - its a working Navy base, after all (sort of).

Phillips? There's no "Phillips" near the Constitution. And she was never moved
around the harbor, she was always at Pier 1. And there's no Key St. in Boston.
But wait! There's a Key Highway in Baltimore. And a Phillips Restaurant right
near where they keep the ... wait for it ... The Constellation!

Nav was all along confusing the Constitution for the Constellation! But isn't
that an easy mistake? Weren't they sister ships? Well, not really.

For those who don't know the story, there's a ship in Baltimore Harbor that has
been billed as the original Constellation, a smaller version of the
Constitution, launched in 1797. However, it turned out to be a hoax. The
original Constellation was broken up in Norfolk in 1853, and a new ship, of
larger proportions, was built in 1855 and given the name Constellation. Recent
inspection has proven that the framing is completely different from the
original, so any claim that the new ship was some form of refit of the original
is simply bogus. At some later point someone actually rebuilt the new
Constellation to resemble the original, and the hoax was adopted well meaning
folks in Baltimore. They now admit there is little or no connection between the
ships.

It is true that the new Constellation is in pretty sad shape - I felt a bit
embarrassed walking around it knowing we had the real thing in Boston. And I
suppose she deserves a spot in our history, but she is NOT Old Ironsides!

Does anyone think that nav knows anything about the Constitution? BWAHAHAHA!

-jeff

Nav's Big Blunder
 

Well you said I was lying but I was not. To lie means to 'willfully
deceive' so I guess you should still apologise to me. I'll agree I had
confused the Constellation and Constitution (I hope that's not old age
taking over but rather the fact that it was a long time ago) but I
certainly wasn't lying about her -as my pictures show.

Cheers

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

Oh rats we were not talking about the same ship! My mistake.


To coin a phrase "I think an apology is in order"

Actually, paying off your mistaken bet would be even nicer, but we'll
take things one at a time. Rome wasn't built in a day and all that.

thanks in advance
Doug King

Why does Doug
 

feel compelled to make up lies:


BTW Thomas Gilmer, whom you called incompetent,


No, I never mentioned Gilmer and never called him incompetant. So why
does he do it?

Cheers

Why does Doug
 

feel compelled to say


a man who has worked as a naval
architect's apprentice but cannot explain stability.


First I was not an apprentice but a student. I've posted many times on
the determinents of stability so why does he do it?

Cheers

Why does Doug
 

I've posted many times on
the determinents of stability so why does he do it?

To make you jump through yet another hoop.
--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Why does Doug
 

... I've posted many times on
the determinents of stability so why does he do it?


And you say the difference between 1983, 1988, and 1994 is "maths" when
it is simply a matter of not not know WTF you're talking about... again

katysails wrote:
To make you jump through yet another hoop.

Maybe all this jumping through hoops is why Navvie thinks he's the
Michael Jordan of sailing? And he doesn't realize how dull his tools are!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Why does Doug
 

DSK wrote:


And you say the difference between 1983, 1988, and 1994 is "maths" when
it is simply a matter of not not know WTF you're talking about... again


I never said that. So you are, in fact, a lier.


Maybe all this jumping through hoops is why Navvie thinks he's the
Michael Jordan of sailing? And he doesn't realize how dull his tools are!



Well 'Mr' expert Lightning racer, tell us again how the Lighning champs
only use cross cut spinnakers like you and how great your spinnaker trim
is?

Hahahahhahahahha

Cheers

Why does Doug
 

OK, I suspect you are right but I only try to offset his BS. I'll not
engage him in further discussion -he's not of any interest to me anyway.
You know I actually feel sorry for his poor wife.

Cheers

katysails wrote:

I've posted many times on
the determinents of stability so why does he do it?

To make you jump through yet another hoop.

Nav's Big Blunder
 

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...


Nav ie: jet setter, international genious, world savy, American expert.

Bwaaaaahahahahahhaha ROTFLMAO

Thanks Jeff! Did the dentist notice the sudden grin?

Joe






So I'm sitting in the dentist's chair this afternoon trying to will my mind as
far as possible from my body and I start contemplating Nav's old comments. They
just don't fit in with my recollections of the Constitution.

I don't recall any metal bands around her. She wasn't sinking. There were
always Navy personal - its a working Navy base, after all (sort of).

Phillips? There's no "Phillips" near the Constitution. And she was never moved
around the harbor, she was always at Pier 1. And there's no Key St. in Boston.
But wait! There's a Key Highway in Baltimore. And a Phillips Restaurant right
near where they keep the ... wait for it ... The Constellation!

Nav was all along confusing the Constitution for the Constellation! But isn't
that an easy mistake? Weren't they sister ships? Well, not really.

For those who don't know the story, there's a ship in Baltimore Harbor that has
been billed as the original Constellation, a smaller version of the
Constitution, launched in 1797. However, it turned out to be a hoax. The
original Constellation was broken up in Norfolk in 1853, and a new ship, of
larger proportions, was built in 1855 and given the name Constellation. Recent
inspection has proven that the framing is completely different from the
original, so any claim that the new ship was some form of refit of the original
is simply bogus. At some later point someone actually rebuilt the new
Constellation to resemble the original, and the hoax was adopted well meaning
folks in Baltimore. They now admit there is little or no connection between the
ships.

It is true that the new Constellation is in pretty sad shape - I felt a bit
embarrassed walking around it knowing we had the real thing in Boston. And I
suppose she deserves a spot in our history, but she is NOT Old Ironsides!

Does anyone think that nav knows anything about the Constitution? BWAHAHAHA!

-jeff

Why does Doug
 

MC stated: OK, I suspect you are right but I only try to offset his BS.
I'll not
engage him in further discussion -he's not of any interest to me anyway.
You know I actually feel sorry for his poor wife.

If you don't want to engage him in any further discussion, then you should
not use his wife as a troll.....it makes your effort seem insincere....


--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Nav's Big Blunder
 

"Navigator" wrote in message
...
But at least I was not lying about it eh? :-)

I suppose we should be grateful that you're not claiming it was a deliberate
troll from the begginning.

It wasn't just that you were wrong - you went on at length about how you know
more than everyone else about the "Constitution."

Lets consider for a moment what you did claim:

"You do know she's motoring? 10 years ago she had nearly sunk from neglect."

"No it wasn't. It was splitting open like a rotten egg and was being
braced by steel bands with fire pumps running 24/7. I was there -I
walked past her every day..."

"Sorry jeff I don't see how anything I posted was wrong"

"Not just pumps -fire pumps! And steel belts to stop her splitting open.
At the time I wrote to the mayor pointing how appalling her state was
and questioned how such a rich country not afford to maintain it's few
historical relics and connection founding history. It seemed that the
explanation resided in a lack of clear lines of responsibility between
state and federal for historical items. Meanwhile she just decayed more
and more rapidly."

And my favorite:
"Well if you don't want to believe my post then so be it, but it says
more about you than me. Sorry. Do you really think I don't know the
Constitution better than anyone here? Did you know I was a 'friend' of
the Constitution? But believe what you wish -it's all in your perception
anyway."

"Say what you like but I was there and you weren't."

"As she
was splitting opoen serious fire pumps were put on to try to stop her
sinking and still the State and Government argued about who should pay.
Now, I can't remember any Navy crew on board -just a civilian
shop/museum. The people taking tourists around were dressed like
civilians. These are FACTS. She was described as a 'Corpse' and everyone
who knew her was appalled at the way the buck was being passed around
for her massive repair bill. If only they had maintained her..."

"It was a disgrace that the rich US had allowed her to reach this
condition but all that I said was true -as you can see."

You even went so far as to post a link about the resotration of the
"Constellation" claiming it was the same ship. Ironically, that same link even
contained a description of the Constellation Hoax:
http://www.hazegray.org/faq/smn8.htm#H3

"An apology from you would be in order."

Nav's Big Blunder
 

I wasn't grinning that much - I thought I was going in for simple impressions,
but it got more complicated. When you hear the dentist say "Nurse, quick,
anesthesia!" you know you have a bit of a problem.



"Joe" wrote in message
om...
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...


Nav ie: jet setter, international genious, world savy, American expert.

Bwaaaaahahahahahhaha ROTFLMAO

Thanks Jeff! Did the dentist notice the sudden grin?

Joe






So I'm sitting in the dentist's chair this afternoon trying to will my mind
as
far as possible from my body and I start contemplating Nav's old comments.
They
just don't fit in with my recollections of the Constitution.

I don't recall any metal bands around her. She wasn't sinking. There were
always Navy personal - its a working Navy base, after all (sort of).

Phillips? There's no "Phillips" near the Constitution. And she was never
moved
around the harbor, she was always at Pier 1. And there's no Key St. in
Boston.
But wait! There's a Key Highway in Baltimore. And a Phillips Restaurant
right
near where they keep the ... wait for it ... The Constellation!

Nav was all along confusing the Constitution for the Constellation! But
isn't
that an easy mistake? Weren't they sister ships? Well, not really.

For those who don't know the story, there's a ship in Baltimore Harbor that
has
been billed as the original Constellation, a smaller version of the
Constitution, launched in 1797. However, it turned out to be a hoax. The
original Constellation was broken up in Norfolk in 1853, and a new ship, of
larger proportions, was built in 1855 and given the name Constellation.
Recent
inspection has proven that the framing is completely different from the
original, so any claim that the new ship was some form of refit of the
original
is simply bogus. At some later point someone actually rebuilt the new
Constellation to resemble the original, and the hoax was adopted well
meaning
folks in Baltimore. They now admit there is little or no connection between
the
ships.

It is true that the new Constellation is in pretty sad shape - I felt a bit
embarrassed walking around it knowing we had the real thing in Boston. And
I
suppose she deserves a spot in our history, but she is NOT Old Ironsides!

Does anyone think that nav knows anything about the Constitution?
BWAHAHAHA!

-jeff

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

"Jeff Morris" wrote

BTW, my wife did a brief cruise on the Pride shortly before the sinking.

proving yet again the old saying,'' women are bad luck on ships''.

SV

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

proving yet again the old saying,'' women are bad luck on ships''.

Scotty Potti needs to believe that as no woman will step aboard his rat trap.

RB

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

Bobsprit wrote:

proving yet again the old saying,'' women are bad luck on ships''.

Scotty Potti needs to believe that as no woman will step aboard his rat trap.


Proving yet again the old saying, "Bobsprit has no sense of humour."




Regards


Donal
--

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

Bobsprit wrote:

proving yet again the old saying,'' women are bad luck on ships''.

Scotty Potti needs to believe that as no woman will step aboard his rat trap.


Proving yet again the old saying, "Bobsprit has no sense of humour."




Regards


Donal
--

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

Scotty Potti needs to believe that as no woman will step aboard his rat trap.


Proving yet again the old saying, "Bobsprit has no sense of humour."


You weren't funny the 1st time...try posting again!

Bwahahahaha!

RB

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

Bobsprit wrote:

Scotty Potti needs to believe that as no woman will step aboard his rat trap.



Proving yet again the old saying, "Bobsprit has no sense of humour."


You weren't funny the 1st time...try posting again!


New newsreader. I might give up on it.



Regards


Donal
--

Photos - Nelsons Flagship, Victory
 

"Donal" wrote

Proving yet again the old saying, "Bobsprit has no sense ."


I concur.