A Convenient Fiction
 

"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of Bassy.
8)

A Convenient Fiction
 

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

A Convenient Fiction
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

I saw the movie twice now. If you don't already have your mind made up
before hand it is fiction, it is very informative. I read a lot of science
articles and didn't see anywhere a personal slant from Gore. I thought one
of the best points was the correlation between Co2 in the atmosphere and ice
ages in the past. By monitoring Antarctic ice cores it is clear ice ages
follow a rise in Co2. Scientists can go back 650,000 years (seven ice ages).
The Co2 level now is higher than it has been in the last 650,000 years and
still rapidly rising. At the level it is rising in 30-40 yrs. it will be
twice as high as it has ever been. Another interesting point was being shown
an ice core that researchers could tell the exact year lead was added to
gasoline and the exact year legislation was passed to remove the lead. The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?
What a stupid question.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

A Convenient Fiction
 

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes
of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it,
Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Wow, that's asking an awful lot. 8)

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!

A Convenient Fiction
 

ACP wrote:
"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes
of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it,
Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Wow, that's asking an awful lot. 8)

I'm telling you, with infatuation like that, Dan's going to get
jealous........

A Convenient Fiction
 

basskisser wrote:
ACP wrote:

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. ..

On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:

On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
ooglegroups.com...

ACP wrote:

"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
news:5c56o2hilt5qt5jhp5kqm6iup6eemjjfe7@ 4ax.com...

A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes
of
Bassy.
8)

Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it,
Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Wow, that's asking an awful lot. 8)


I'm telling you, with infatuation like that, Dan's going to get
jealous........


Maybe Dan & ACP can get together & practice some touchy/feely infatuation.

A Convenient Fiction
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
ps.com...

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the
likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch
it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!


Maybe Jack's reply was sarcasm? Not unheard of around here.

A Convenient Fiction
 

ACP wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ps.com...

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the
likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch
it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!


Maybe Jack's reply was sarcasm? Not unheard of around here.

Nope. If it were, he'd have said so from the beginning instead of
trying to defend himself.

It's nice to see that your infatuation with me is growing daily!

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:
basskisser wrote:
ACP wrote:

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. ..

On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:

On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
ooglegroups.com...

ACP wrote:

"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
news:5c56o2hilt5qt5jhp5kqm6iup6eemjjfe7@ 4ax.com...

A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes
of
Bassy.
8)

Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it,
Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Wow, that's asking an awful lot. 8)


I'm telling you, with infatuation like that, Dan's going to get
jealous........


Maybe Dan & ACP can get together & practice some touchy/feely infatuation.

Hmm, could be. I'd have thought jealousy would get in the way, but you
never know. People with infatuation complexes do strange things!

A Convenient Fiction
 

On 16 Dec 2006 15:28:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!

So you weren't able to answer the questions I posed, huh? That's OK,
I didn't think you would, or could. Let me explain, try to follow
along, put your finger on the screen and move your lips as you read,
if it helps.

The two foot globe statement wasn't informative, other than being a
somewhat interesting excercise in scaling. Its intention in Gore's
"movie" is to grab your attention and scare you, as in "Oh my! The
earth's atmosphere is only as think as a layer of varnish! We better
do something!"

My weather statement was made to point out that the two foot globe,
while interesting, has no relevance to the earth we inhabit and its
own atmosphere. You see, with our full sized molecules, and the laws
of nature that they must abide by, "weather" wouldn't even be possible
in an atmosphere as thick as "a coat of varnish".

In reality, our earth is about 7926 MILES in diameter, which is
something over 41 MILLION feet, not 2 feet. Its atmosphere has 5
layers, and the one we live in, the troposphere, is about 10 MILES
thick. The 5th layer extends out to about 6000 MILES. A little
thicker and more substantial than a coat of varnish, huh?

In short, the two foot globe statement was a cheap and irrelevant
scare tactic designed to grab the more simple of those among us. My
weather statement exposed it for what it was.

But hey, the scare tactic worked on you, didn't it.

Merry Christmas.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 15:28:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html
The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.
The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?
What a stupid question.
Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.
No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.
What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.
Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!

So you weren't able to answer the questions I posed, huh? That's OK,
I didn't think you would, or could. Let me explain, try to follow
along, put your finger on the screen and move your lips as you read,
if it helps.

The two foot globe statement wasn't informative, other than being a
somewhat interesting excercise in scaling. Its intention in Gore's
"movie" is to grab your attention and scare you, as in "Oh my! The
earth's atmosphere is only as think as a layer of varnish! We better
do something!"

My weather statement was made to point out that the two foot globe,
while interesting, has no relevance to the earth we inhabit and its
own atmosphere. You see, with our full sized molecules, and the laws
of nature that they must abide by, "weather" wouldn't even be possible
in an atmosphere as thick as "a coat of varnish".

In reality, our earth is about 7926 MILES in diameter, which is
something over 41 MILLION feet, not 2 feet. Its atmosphere has 5
layers, and the one we live in, the troposphere, is about 10 MILES
thick. The 5th layer extends out to about 6000 MILES. A little
thicker and more substantial than a coat of varnish, huh?

In short, the two foot globe statement was a cheap and irrelevant
scare tactic designed to grab the more simple of those among us. My
weather statement exposed it for what it was.

But hey, the scare tactic worked on you, didn't it.

Merry Christmas.
Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, trolling for fights. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is doing his
best to screw it up.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 15:28:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:


Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html

The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.

The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon


What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

What a stupid question.

Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.

No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.

What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.

Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!

So you weren't able to answer the questions I posed, huh?

Oh, good God!! How can I answer it any more concise??????
That's OK,
I didn't think you would, or could. Let me explain, try to follow
along, put your finger on the screen and move your lips as you read,
if it helps.

The two foot globe statement wasn't informative, other than being a
somewhat interesting excercise in scaling. Its intention in Gore's
"movie" is to grab your attention and scare you, as in "Oh my! The
earth's atmosphere is only as think as a layer of varnish! We better
do something!"

No, it's intention is to give you the facts. If you aren't bright
enough to grasp the fact, that is YOUR problem.

My weather statement was made to point out that the two foot globe,
while interesting, has no relevance to the earth we inhabit and its
own atmosphere.

Sure it does. Just as much as a scale drawing of a house is a
representation of that house. It's really simple.

You see, with our full sized molecules, and the laws
of nature that they must abide by, "weather" wouldn't even be possible
in an atmosphere as thick as "a coat of varnish".

It's a SCALE for God's sake!!! No one ever, ever said that the earth's
atmosphere is as thick as a coat of varnish.

In reality, our earth is about 7926 MILES in diameter, which is
something over 41 MILLION feet, not 2 feet. Its atmosphere has 5
layers, and the one we live in, the troposphere, is about 10 MILES
thick. The 5th layer extends out to about 6000 MILES. A little
thicker and more substantial than a coat of varnish, huh?

SCALE.......... Again, NO ONE EVER SAID THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE WAS AS
THICK AS A COAT OF VARNISH. What WAS said, I take you can't grasp, is
if you scaled the earth down to a 2 foot sphere, the atmosphere, when
scaled down accordingly, would be as thick as a coat of varnish. Jeez.

In short, the two foot globe statement was a cheap and irrelevant
scare tactic designed to grab the more simple of those among us. My
weather statement exposed it for what it was.

No, it was information. It's a shame that some people are too dumb to
be able to correlate that scale to the earth.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 13:17:34 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 15:28:50 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 11:29:04 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On 16 Dec 2006 06:58:34 -0800, "basskisser"
wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 19:12:23 -0500, "Dixon"
wrote:

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
ACP wrote:
"Duke Nukem" wrote in message
...
A Not Al Gore Production.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.a...20061215a.html
The pseudonym isn't going to protect from the wrath of the likes of
Bassy.
8)
Man, talk about an infatuation with me......You'd better watch it, Dan
will get jealous.
The
atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two feet in
dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish.
Dixon

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?
What a stupid question.
Only if you're not thinking creatively.

Oh, um, nevermind. It's over your head.
No. It was just an idiotic question. Want to know why? Simple, because
you took a statement that was informative too literally. It's called
perspective, something I take you don't have.
What exactly did I take literally, and how so? Be specific, and
explain what exactly you think my statement meant, at least to you.
Oh, hell. Are you so out of it that you don't even remember the
sentence you were making your idiotic remark about??? Well, here it is
again:

"The atmosphere seems almost infinitely thick to us, but on a globe two
feet in dia. it would be as thick as a coat of varnish."

With me so far? Come on, it's not really difficult, even for you, is
it?? Okay, here was your idiotic reply, too, just in case you've lost
THAT in your little mind:

What's the weather like on your two foot in diameter world?

Now, how could anybody think that that was an intelligent question?
Hmm, something tells me that YOU think it is!

So you weren't able to answer the questions I posed, huh? That's OK,
I didn't think you would, or could. Let me explain, try to follow
along, put your finger on the screen and move your lips as you read,
if it helps.

The two foot globe statement wasn't informative, other than being a
somewhat interesting excercise in scaling. Its intention in Gore's
"movie" is to grab your attention and scare you, as in "Oh my! The
earth's atmosphere is only as think as a layer of varnish! We better
do something!"

My weather statement was made to point out that the two foot globe,
while interesting, has no relevance to the earth we inhabit and its
own atmosphere. You see, with our full sized molecules, and the laws
of nature that they must abide by, "weather" wouldn't even be possible
in an atmosphere as thick as "a coat of varnish".

In reality, our earth is about 7926 MILES in diameter, which is
something over 41 MILLION feet, not 2 feet. Its atmosphere has 5
layers, and the one we live in, the troposphere, is about 10 MILES
thick. The 5th layer extends out to about 6000 MILES. A little
thicker and more substantial than a coat of varnish, huh?

In short, the two foot globe statement was a cheap and irrelevant
scare tactic designed to grab the more simple of those among us. My
weather statement exposed it for what it was.

But hey, the scare tactic worked on you, didn't it.

Merry Christmas.
Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, trolling for fights. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is doing his
best to screw it up.

True... you're right. I'm not going to get in a prolonged argument
over this. I just felt I should explain myself, since he was so
infatuated with my original post (that was a followup to someone else,
not him) that he felt he had to start this up.

Besides, it's 73 degrees here today, and we're getting ready to drive
the Torino down to the marina and go out on the boat for a while.

Have a good one!

A Convenient Fiction
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:40:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 12/17/2006 1:17 PM, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:


Merry Christmas.
Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, trolling for fights. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is doing his
best to screw it up.




All you and Jackoff have done over the years is clutter up this
newsgroup with KRAP. Do either one of you own a boat? Have you ever?
Doubtful.

Harry, you made a nice post earlier. Now you're letting yourself get down
with the Don W and Basskisser crowd. Come on, you can do better.
--
John H

*Have a great Christmas and a spectacular New Year!*

A Convenient Fiction
 

JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:40:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


On 12/17/2006 1:17 PM, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

Merry Christmas.

Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, trolling for fights. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is doing his
best to screw it up.




All you and Jackoff have done over the years is clutter up this
newsgroup with KRAP. Do either one of you own a boat? Have you ever?
Doubtful.


Harry, you made a nice post earlier. Now you're letting yourself get down
with the Don W and Basskisser crowd. Come on, you can do better.
--
John H

*Have a great Christmas and a spectacular New Year!*


The guy who posts in here as 'Don W' might not appreciate your comments.
As for me... I take them with a grain of salt.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and
hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing
his best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.


Don,
I know you would not know what to do if you could not follow these
trolls around and say "Yah, I know what you mean", but give it a try.
You have been upset with anyone who has tried to stop the silly name
calling, but even you must be get bored of it eventually.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 16:40:47 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 12/17/2006 1:17 PM, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:


Merry Christmas.
Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, trolling for fights. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is doing his
best to screw it up.




All you and Jackoff have done over the years is clutter up this
newsgroup with KRAP. Do either one of you own a boat? Have you ever?
Doubtful.

I've owned a couple of real ones. I've never managed to own imaginary
ones like you, though.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.


And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.

Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.


And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?

Don has been upset ever since Chuck tried to eliminate the cut and paste
inflammatory post. In Don't mind, anyone who discourages the cut and
paste the corresponding flame fest is ruining the part of the NG Don
likes.

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:04:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 12/17/2006 6:41 PM, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.
Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.

And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?

Don has been upset ever since Chuck tried to eliminate the cut and paste
inflammatory post. In Don't mind, anyone who discourages the cut and
paste the corresponding flame fest is ruining the part of the NG Don
likes.


Ahh, two of the most useless posters, "Reggie" and "Jackoff," are giving
each other reach-arounds.

Harry, you're such a neat guy your name-calling is welcomed!
--
John H

*Have a great Christmas and a spectacular New Year!*

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:14:53 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 19:04:16 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 12/17/2006 6:41 PM, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.
Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.

And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?

Don has been upset ever since Chuck tried to eliminate the cut and paste
inflammatory post. In Don't mind, anyone who discourages the cut and
paste the corresponding flame fest is ruining the part of the NG Don
likes.


Ahh, two of the most useless posters, "Reggie" and "Jackoff," are giving
each other reach-arounds.

Harry, you're such a neat guy your name-calling is welcomed!

Name calling, "reach-around" wishing posters don't actually own boats,
do they? But they are neat!

Heh.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Jack Goff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this NG
with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts and hope
he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is *doing his
best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this
NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts
and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is
*doing his best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!
Don,
When someone cuts and paste a newspaper article, they have one purpose.
What I suggested is to ignore those people.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this
NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts
and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is
*doing his best to screw it up*.


Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.


And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?

Don has been upset ever since Chuck tried to eliminate the cut and paste
inflammatory post. *In Don't mind*, anyone who discourages the cut and
paste the corresponding flame fest is ruining the part of the NG Don likes.

I can't speak for this *Don't* person you are referring to but I don't
usually read or care about 'cut & paste' posts.
I just like correcting people who preach one thing and then go ahead in
the next post and do just what they condemn others for.
To make matters worse, they 'll ignore the half dozen clowns who
continually bait one individual but will attack that same person when he
responds.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this
NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his posts
and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but Bass is
*doing his best to screw it up*.



Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!

Donny,

You really need to do a review...

http://tinyurl.com/yg8ct2

....and lead by example.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A Convenient Fiction
 

Dan wrote:
Don White wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this
NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his
posts and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but
Bass is *doing his best to screw it up*.




Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!


Donny,

You really need to do a review...

http://tinyurl.com/yg8ct2

...and lead by example.


Not sure what you're trying to prove here.....
Only a couple of the quotes listed were by me

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:

Dan wrote:

Don White wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up
this NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore
his posts and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better,
but Bass is *doing his best to screw it up*.





Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!



Donny,

You really need to do a review...

http://tinyurl.com/yg8ct2

...and lead by example.


Not sure what you're trying to prove here.....
Only a couple of the quotes listed were by me

Read your posts. How many would make this newsgroup "quieter and more
civil"? Compare that to the number that are trolls and flames. Get it now?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A Convenient Fiction
 

Don White wrote:

To make matters worse, they 'll ignore the half dozen clowns who
continually bait one individual but will attack that same person when he
responds.

Can you show where six people "continually bait" one person? That "one
individual" is the newsgroup troll. He lives for confrontation and you
are the boy's puppy who is there to follow him and nip at the heels of
anyone who responds with, often, goofy responses that only you and the
boy might find funny. How does your behavior make matters better, Don?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:49:19 GMT, Don White
wrote:

Dan wrote:
Don White wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up this
NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore his
posts and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better, but
Bass is *doing his best to screw it up*.




Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by example.
If not...carry on!


Donny,

You really need to do a review...

http://tinyurl.com/yg8ct2

...and lead by example.


Not sure what you're trying to prove here.....
Only a couple of the quotes listed were by me

Heh...

You must not understand how to use your mouse.

You click on the name of the thread displayed.

Every one was an attempted troll by you.

Priceless.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Dan wrote:
Don White wrote:

To make matters worse, they 'll ignore the half dozen clowns who
continually bait one individual but will attack that same person when
he responds.


Can you show where six people "continually bait" one person? That "one
individual" is the newsgroup troll. He lives for confrontation and you
are the boy's puppy who is there to follow him and nip at the heels of
anyone who responds with, often, goofy responses that only you and the
boy might find funny. How does your behavior make matters better, Don?



I shine the light of day into the dark corners and under the rocks.
Does that bother your eyes?

A Convenient Fiction
 

Dan wrote:
Don White wrote:

Dan wrote:

Don White wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:57:31 GMT, Don White
wrote:


Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


Jack,
You will never convince Bassy of anything, he is cluttering up
this NG with crap, *trolling for fights*. It is time to ignore
his posts and hope he disappears. The NG has gotten much better,
but Bass is *doing his best to screw it up*.






Yet here you are doing exactly what you accuse Basskisser of doing.
eg: *trolling for fights*
*doing his best to screw it up*.



And you're here trying to start a fight with Reggie.

What exactly is it you're trolling for, Don?


I just want posters to be truthful....
If you want the newsgroup to be quieter and more civil..lead by
example.
If not...carry on!




Donny,

You really need to do a review...

http://tinyurl.com/yg8ct2

...and lead by example.


Not sure what you're trying to prove here.....
Only a couple of the quotes listed were by me


Read your posts. How many would make this newsgroup "quieter and more
civil"? Compare that to the number that are trolls and flames. Get it
now?


All 'I get' is that your efforts here are a complete waste of time...
and worse, because you enjoy agitating a poster that you know will
respond back to your trolls.
If you want to improve the newsgroup... leave. The noise portion will be
reduced by about 20%

A Convenient Fiction
 

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 20:20:44 -0500, Dan
wrote:

Can you show where six people "continually bait" one person? That "one
individual" is the newsgroup troll. He lives for confrontation and you
are the boy's puppy who is there to follow him and nip at the heels of
anyone who responds with, often, goofy responses that only you and the
boy might find funny. How does your behavior make matters better, Don?

Dan, you've over stayed you welcome. Lead by example and give it up.

A Convenient Fiction
 

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Don,
When someone cuts and paste a newspaper article, they have one purpose.
What I suggested is to ignore those people.

I posted the article to be informative. I know that a lot of people
here choose to ignore information.