About Us

Happy John

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:33:12 -0500, X ` Man wrote:

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.

Why the personal insults?

JustWait[_2_]

On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

X ` Man[_3_]

On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

--
http://tinyurl.com/7mhuxdj

JustWait[_2_]

On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an
ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly is...

X ` Man[_3_]

On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an
ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly is...

Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having?

--
http://tinyurl.com/7mhuxdj

JustWait[_2_]

On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an
ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly
is...

Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having?

I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information
is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other
sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous.

OK,...here we go...
Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come
over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world
travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to
go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on.

At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available.
Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty
stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing
price of 40 dollars an ounce...

Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements
realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to
take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin
to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all
over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a
lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher
and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the
imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something
foul by the time it got to the US. Although the imported stuff was still
available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the
domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by
the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier.

The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban
consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on
the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no
possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it
started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the
pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the
days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family.

Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically
developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go
for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)...

There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over
the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds
and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime
bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce
if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of
them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune...

So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a nutshell

X ` Man[_3_]

On 2/28/12 9:55 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an
ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly
is...

Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having?

I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information
is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other
sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous.

OK,...here we go...
Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come
over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world
travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to
go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on.

At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available.
Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty
stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing
price of 40 dollars an ounce...

Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements
realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to
take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin
to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all
over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a
lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher
and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the
imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something
foul by the time it gotpot to the US. Although the imported stuff was still
available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the
domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by
the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier.

The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban
consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on
the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no
possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it
started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the
pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the
days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family.

Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically
developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go
for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)...

There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over
the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds
and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime
bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce
if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of
them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune...

So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a
nutshell

Ahh, thanks. I don't follow the pot price curve... :)

--
http://tinyurl.com/7mhuxdj

X ` Man[_3_]

On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

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.

We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand
smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a
chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter
how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all
sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass
that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood.
Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS.
Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some
threshold limit value..

I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case
here. Sorry.

It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice.

Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into
general disdain for boats.

--
http://tinyurl.com/7mhuxdj

JustWait[_2_]

On 2/29/2012 6:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 11:02 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:35:06 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

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.

We just have to hope the environmental weenies do not use second hand
smoke as a precedent (infinitesimally small trace amounts of a
chemical) to come after our BOATS (just to stay on topic). No matter
how clean burning your engine is, there are still trace amounts of all
sorts of chemicals in the exhaust. They could even cite the fiberglass
that out gases for years or the paints and preservatives used on wood.
Bottom paint is a super fund site compared to SHS.
Somehow I bet you think these are all harmless because they meet some
threshold limit value..

I can't do much more than giggle at your attempts to build your case
here. Sorry.

It is simply because you refuse to accept your prejudice.

Nah. The general disdain for cigarettes isn't going to portmanteau into
general disdain for boats.

Boats, motorcyles, skateboards, certain animals... When the enviro-nazis
decide they can't afford a toy but want to go to the beach, woods, or
mountains anyway... they go after anybody who is having more fun than
them. They start with "pollution" first, then go to noise, then traffic,
then the EPA, then the Historical society... Until they get you out of
their way so they can enjoy the area to themselves, exactly the way they
feel it should be used...

They are already after boats, just about anywhere they decide to build a
house. They want anything out of the woods they don't have. They move in
next to farms that have been there for generations and try to shut them
down.... Yup, they are already after boats. Just do drive yours inland
down in Florida, or even here on the CT River...

JustWait[_2_]

On 2/29/2012 6:33 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 9:55 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:46 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 8:11 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/28/2012 8:02 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/28/12 7:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 3:20 PM, BAR 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?

It is having a huge effect on the market.. Changing the whole
dynamic.
Taking the manufacture and distribution to a totally different level.
Away from organized criminal organizations, and directly to Suzie
Homemaker...

You must have excised the content here.

I think so. My comment was directed at the notion that 350 dollar an
ounce pot was not having an effect on the market... And it certainly
is...

Ahh. I missed that. Is that up or down? And what effect is it having?

I do not endorse the use of any illegal substance, all of my information
is based on hearsay, my own research over the internet, and other
sources over the years who wish to remain anonymous.

OK,...here we go...
Well, back in 1976 an ounce was less than ten dollars. It would come
over from Jamaica or Vietnam with traveling service men, and other world
travelers, average Joes, it was still somewhat casual but beginning to
go more main stream (move to the suburbs) from about 69 on.

At that time there were two distinctive levels of quality available.
Regular like I said, less than ten buck an ounce, and then the specialty
stuff like Colombian Gold, and Panama Red which cold reach the amazing
price of 40 dollars an ounce...

Things really changed quickly in the 80's when criminal elements
realized how much money was to be made on pot, and really decided to
take over the business. One of the things they did right away was begin
to develop domestic production by sending growers from California all
over the country, north western Mass, and particularly to Canada where a
lot of the production moved indoors. This all made for a much fresher
and significantly more potent, hand tended product rather than the
imported stuff which was often beat to **** and smelling of something
foul by the time it gotpot to the US. Although the imported stuff was
still
available, by the mid 80's it was almost completely replaced by the
domestic crop and the prices skyrocketed to an average 200 an ounce by
the mid 80's ten times more than it had been just a decade earlier.

The whole market swung back in the last couple decades for suburban
consumers anyway. With the availability of technology, information on
the net, genetically superior seeds in the mail with practically no
possibility of discovery has turned the whole market right back where it
started with random, unconnected (mostly non criminal except for the
pot) producers all over the country. Distribution has gone back to the
days of the local farmer, mostly serving local friends and family.

Stronger and better (taste, smoothness, etc.) is being genetically
developed all the time and some of the higher priced strains now can go
for nearly 500 an ounce for top bud (top plant material)...

There is still a good amount of poor quality imported stuff coming over
the border, but no longer the great strains of the past like the golds
and reds, just commercial bunk, mostly sold in the inner city in dime
bags on the street corner. That can still go for close to 200 an ounce
if you were to find a distributor willing to sell that much. Most of
them want to cut it to dime bags and make a fortune...

So, that's how the price of pot has effected the industry... in a
nutshell

Ahh, thanks. I don't follow the pot price curve... :)

Hummm, yeah I know a couple here will get stupid but it's all on the up
and up. I get my info mostly from legal sites representing legal retail
stores across the country and world... I tend to stir them up a bit as
although I know there are some very legitimate medical reasons for some
folks to smoke, I don't subscribe to the whole "medical marijuana" hoax,
I just believe in straight legalization... 95 to probably 98% of the
folks using "medical marijuana" are full of crap...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
update	Paul Oman	Boat Building	0	June 20th 08 06:37 PM
GB update	Eisboch	General	38	November 16th 04 05:03 PM
"26 Again" update	FamilySailor	ASA	3	August 20th 04 08:44 PM

Menu

About Us