| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Round the world
"Bruce" wrote in message
... On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:04:01 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "Flying Pig" wrote in message ... Just a small interjection here... I once saw an on-line video of an instructor sailing a dinghy (that would be a small racing sailboat) BACKWARDS through a maze (pilings in a row, zig-zagging between them)... You can do amazing things if you're one with your ship... Agreed! There might just be hope for you as a sailor yet, Skippy! It's a sad state of affairs when confirmed motor heads attempt to tell those of us who know how to handle our boats under sail alone that it can't be done or that it's somehow rude, anti-social or dangerous to do it. Balderdash! Wilbur Hubbard "We who know how to handle our boats"? Willie-boy, the renowned Armchair Sailor? Who gained his vast knowledge from reading magazines? You have to be joking. I can sail circles around you, Bruce. Well, perhaps not -- it's pretty difficult to sail circles around a dock because it's attached to the shore. Wilbur Hubbard |
Round the world
"Duncan McCormack" wrote in message
... In article s.com, lid, Wilbur Hubbard says... wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:09:05 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote this crap: snip Imagine if your lazy attitude was in place 200-250 years ago in the age of sail where very large vessels plied the seas and the ports without the hint of an engine on board. Did freight and passengers not get delivered before the age of steam boats? Yes. Arrival times could be within weeks, sometimes months, and many boats didn't arrive at all, and today, make popular diving atractions. So? What does that mean other than sometimes pure sailboats foundered. That most certainly does not belie the fact that motorboats also founder! Wilbur Hubbard |
Round the world
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote wrote Really? Which clause of whose constitution, precisely? "Section 2 of Article III of the United States Constitution gives original jurisdiction in admiralty matters to the federal courts. The federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over most admiralty and maritime claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Under this statute, federal district courts are granted original jurisdiction over admiralty actions "saving to suitors," a right to file suit for most of these actions in state court." I don't see sailboats or motors mentioned there. Too ****ing bad!!! But it isn't. Interior waters have always been left to the states. And if there is a bridge, it usually spans over state waters. Intercoastal, bays, harbors, lakes, rivers, streams, rills. All state waters. So the states can decide the laws that are beneficial to protect property and lives. Now, I suspect one can sail under the Golden Gate, I don't see why not, but most of the intracoastal would be limited as there are safety issues if all other boats have to give way to some a*hole tacking under sail in a narrow waterway. The intracoastal is 72' wide. You get turned sideways in there and you could run aground, or cause a barge to run aground causing millions of dollars in damages. Or more likely it'll just run you slap over, especially in the costal waters of LA (that'd be Lous'ana to you yankees). So you can pretend it's "all sail, all the time" if you like. The stark realities are that for safety reasons, for convenience, out of sheer respect for your fellow boaters, then there will be certain times that a motor is going to have to be used. |
Round the world
"paulthomascpa" wrote in message
... "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote wrote Really? Which clause of whose constitution, precisely? "Section 2 of Article III of the United States Constitution gives original jurisdiction in admiralty matters to the federal courts. The federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over most admiralty and maritime claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1333. Under this statute, federal district courts are granted original jurisdiction over admiralty actions "saving to suitors," a right to file suit for most of these actions in state court." I don't see sailboats or motors mentioned there. Too ****ing bad!!! But it isn't. Interior waters have always been left to the states. And if there is a bridge, it usually spans over state waters. Intercoastal, bays, harbors, lakes, rivers, streams, rills. All state waters. Hey stupid! Waters that connect to the oceans are considered navigatible. Navigatable waters come under FEDERAL perview. So take your ignorant communist views and stuff them. Wilbur Hubbard. |
Round the world
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:58:06 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote: "Bruce" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:04:01 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote: "Flying Pig" wrote in message ... Just a small interjection here... I once saw an on-line video of an instructor sailing a dinghy (that would be a small racing sailboat) BACKWARDS through a maze (pilings in a row, zig-zagging between them)... You can do amazing things if you're one with your ship... Agreed! There might just be hope for you as a sailor yet, Skippy! It's a sad state of affairs when confirmed motor heads attempt to tell those of us who know how to handle our boats under sail alone that it can't be done or that it's somehow rude, anti-social or dangerous to do it. Balderdash! Wilbur Hubbard "We who know how to handle our boats"? Willie-boy, the renowned Armchair Sailor? Who gained his vast knowledge from reading magazines? You have to be joking. I can sail circles around you, Bruce. Well, perhaps not -- it's pretty difficult to sail circles around a dock because it's attached to the shore. Wilbur Hubbard An exciting challenge. O.K. do it.... I'm waiting. But of course your reputation is safe as you are roosting in a bay in Florida and I'm half way round the world from you and you lack the "intestinal fortitude" to come to the races. Willie-boy ( in his La-Z-Boy) the intrepid sailor. -- Cheers, Bruce |
Round the world
|
Round the world
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote Hey stupid! Waters that connect to the oceans are considered navigatible. Navigatable waters come under FEDERAL perview. So take your ignorant communist views and stuff them. All waters flow to the ocean. Or did you flunk out of physics. |
Round the world
"Duncan McCormack" wrote Wilbur Hubbard says... So? What does that mean other than sometimes pure sailboats foundered. That most certainly does not belie the fact that motorboats also founder! Whilst true on face value, if you check the percentages, you'll find todays martitime foundering incidents *far* less prevalent than the days of sailing vessels. So your suggestion is, essentially, false. To be fair here, today's vessels have a tad more electronics for navigation, weather and communication than those from 200+ years ago. Better information & communication has led to better navigation and less wrecks. What you see today though, is a lot more cargo being shipped by power than could ever be done by sail. |
Round the world
"paulthomascpa" wrote in message
... "Wilbur Hubbard" wrote Hey stupid! Waters that connect to the oceans are considered navigatible. Navigatable waters come under FEDERAL perview. So take your ignorant communist views and stuff them. All waters flow to the ocean. Or did you flunk out of physics. You are claiming that the Great Salt Lake, the Caspian Sea, Qinghai Lake and other endorheic bodies of water all have waters that flow to the sea? How droll! You'd better click on this link and get educated, dude! http://alldownstream.wordpress.com/2...world-by-area/ Wilbur Hubbard |
Round the world
"Wilbur Hubbard" opined: You are claiming that the Great Salt Lake, the Caspian Sea, Qinghai Lake and other endorheic bodies of water all have waters that flow to the sea? Don't know about those others, but Salt Lake used to flow to the ocean. Or did you miss that geology class in school. I imagine if the elevation rises enough it'll once again flow to the ocean. For someone who revels in the past, how'd you miss that? Clearly some prehistoric sofa sailor navigated the rivers to what used to be known as the Bonneville Lake. And you'da been proud that they paddled or sailed their craft, nary a motor to be found back then, portaged it when necessary. But since you claim that the Great Salt Lake doesn't flow to the ocean, then please explain why, or what, the U.S. Department of the Interior's function is with respect to the Great Salt Lake? You said "Waters that connect to the oceans are considered navigatible. Navigatable waters come under FEDERAL perview." And then you claim that the Great Salt Lake doesn't connect to the ocean. Yet here we are. A Federal agency having, what term did you use?, oh yeah, "perview" (it's purview and navigable, but who's counting) over the lake. How'd that happen. You should check your logic, or check to see if you have logic. Check your spelling too. |
Round the world
"paulthomascpa" wrote in message
... "Wilbur Hubbard" opined: You are claiming that the Great Salt Lake, the Caspian Sea, Qinghai Lake and other endorheic bodies of water all have waters that flow to the sea? Don't know about those others, but Salt Lake used to flow to the ocean. Or did you miss that geology class in school. I imagine if the elevation rises enough it'll once again flow to the ocean. For someone who revels in the past, how'd you miss that? Clearly some prehistoric sofa sailor navigated the rivers to what used to be known as the Bonneville Lake. And you'da been proud that they paddled or sailed their craft, nary a motor to be found back then, portaged it when necessary. But since you claim that the Great Salt Lake doesn't flow to the ocean, then please explain why, or what, the U.S. Department of the Interior's function is with respect to the Great Salt Lake? You said "Waters that connect to the oceans are considered navigatible. Navigatable waters come under FEDERAL perview." And then you claim that the Great Salt Lake doesn't connect to the ocean. Yet here we are. A Federal agency having, what term did you use?, oh yeah, "perview" (it's purview and navigable, but who's counting) over the lake. How'd that happen. You should check your logic, or check to see if you have logic. Check your spelling too. You, who obviously have no logic, accusing me of the same is ludicrous. You made the STUPID claim, and I quote, "All waters flow to the ocean. Or did you flunk out of physics." I then listed three bodies of water off the top of my head that do not flow to the ocean and I linked to a website that listed the top ten of the many waters that don't flow to the ocean. You ignored the facts and went off on a tangent with spelling lames and possible flowing to the ocean "in the future." Yah right! What don't you get about your dumbass statement, "All waters flow to the ocean," being a present tense statement? Wilbur Hubbard |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:46 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com