On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:19:42 GMT, "Bill Cole"
wrote:

Chuck,
The discussion of theory is part of the scientific process, but do you
believe that any theory has ever been discussed in rec.boats where a general
consensus has been reached? Especially one that involved a terrorist
conspiracy and/or government cover-up. If so, that is a major milestone.

Wasn't your post really designed to provide a venue for shooting the bull,
while we waited for the newspapers and TV's to tell us what was the cause of
the power outage. That is the real purpose for rec.boats, sort of like a
bunch of neighbor getting together to discuss things they have no knowledge
of, and solve the world's problems.

If we ever decide wither or not Bayliner is the best boat in the world or
the worst piece of ****, ever to be thrust on the public, maybe we can move
onto solving the middle east crisis.

Bill, if this is a continuation of our conversation in other threads,
let me say that I agree with you. rec.boats, as a place to "shoot the
breeze", is accepted by most of the regular posters. If a new FAQ
were drawn up today, to be voted on by the paticipants, I have no
doubt that off-topic conversation would be permitted, or we would lose
many of our favorite people.

My main objection to the off-topic (and some On-topic) discussions is
that some posters start slinging abusive personal insults at the drop
of a hat. Profanity proves nothing, except that the speaker has run
out of facts, wit, or intellect.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on this. I enjoy a good argument from
time to time, especially a clever one.

Regards,
noah


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Agreed, and it was therefore ridiculous for Chuck to throw out a theory
without knowing
the facts.

No "theory" was thrown out.
Go back and look at the first post in the thread. There's a comment that
two
guys had been arrested in Seattle, bound for NY, the day before the
blackout.
Followed by a comment that it was probably a coincidence.

By the way, the discussion of theory is one avenue by which to determine
and
evaluate facts. Scientists do it all the time.
To state that it is silly to advance a theory without knowing all the
facts is
to state that it is always silly to advance a theory.

I have no problem with rec.boats being used to shot the ****, but don't try
to fool ourselves that we are having trying to find resolution or prove or
disprove a theory, it is nothing more that idle chitchat. Just take a look
at any of basskisser's post to see us at our best.

"noah" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:19:42 GMT, "Bill Cole"
wrote:

Chuck,
The discussion of theory is part of the scientific process, but do you
believe that any theory has ever been discussed in rec.boats where a
general
consensus has been reached? Especially one that involved a terrorist
conspiracy and/or government cover-up. If so, that is a major milestone.

Wasn't your post really designed to provide a venue for shooting the
bull,
while we waited for the newspapers and TV's to tell us what was the cause
of
the power outage. That is the real purpose for rec.boats, sort of like a
bunch of neighbor getting together to discuss things they have no
knowledge
of, and solve the world's problems.

If we ever decide wither or not Bayliner is the best boat in the world or
the worst piece of ****, ever to be thrust on the public, maybe we can
move
onto solving the middle east crisis.

Bill, if this is a continuation of our conversation in other threads,
let me say that I agree with you. rec.boats, as a place to "shoot the
breeze", is accepted by most of the regular posters. If a new FAQ
were drawn up today, to be voted on by the paticipants, I have no
doubt that off-topic conversation would be permitted, or we would lose
many of our favorite people.

My main objection to the off-topic (and some On-topic) discussions is
that some posters start slinging abusive personal insults at the drop
of a hat. Profanity proves nothing, except that the speaker has run
out of facts, wit, or intellect.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on this. I enjoy a good argument from
time to time, especially a clever one.

Regards,
noah


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Agreed, and it was therefore ridiculous for Chuck to throw out a
theory
without knowing
the facts.

No "theory" was thrown out.
Go back and look at the first post in the thread. There's a comment
that
two
guys had been arrested in Seattle, bound for NY, the day before the
blackout.
Followed by a comment that it was probably a coincidence.

By the way, the discussion of theory is one avenue by which to
determine
and
evaluate facts. Scientists do it all the time.
To state that it is silly to advance a theory without knowing all the
facts is
to state that it is always silly to advance a theory.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message news:rWg0b.193487$uu5.35713@sccrnsc04...
I have no problem with rec.boats being used to shot the ****, but don't try
to fool ourselves that we are having trying to find resolution or prove or
disprove a theory, it is nothing more that idle chitchat. Just take a look
at any of basskisser's post to see us at our best.

Those would be replies to your idiotic diatribes.

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:35:51 GMT, "Bill Cole"
wrote:

I have no problem with rec.boats being used to shot the ****, but don't try
to fool ourselves that we are having trying to find resolution or prove or
disprove a theory, it is nothing more that idle chitchat. Just take a look
at any of basskisser's post to see us at our best.

Ah,...but there you've done it. Do you see?
noah