jerryskids

This thread sux without pics or a link.

I know why you did it, we all do. We just think it's a dumb and worthless discussion. You think you have some great gotcha, and we're all just laughing at you.

Why are you wasting my time with such a question? Instead, leap forward to the point where Trump directed the people to storm the Capitol (or in some entrances, calmly enter).

Well, for starters, the part i had already bolded. Nothing Trump did rises to the level of insurrection, which is why they didn't charge him with it. If we can agree on this, I'll continue. If not, then I'm back to laughing at you.

See what I mean, @The Real timschochet?

Thanks. People give you a hard time, but I appreciate your willingness to admit an error. If I ever make a mistake, I hope to have that same willingness. The "tactical reason" is that they didn't think they could convict him of insurrection, because they have nothing directly tying him to insurrection. All they have is people like @thegeneralarguing "but but he got people riled up and they stormed the Capitol$#@!" That's why they dug deep into the federal code for the crap they charged him with. This has been my primary objection in this entire farce. If you are going to indict a former POTUS, it should be for something serious like insurrection, not "conspiracy to cheat the government" or whatever they ginned up.

Yes, that's the idea, but does anyone actually use those dispensers? Fock that, give me old fashioned yellow with old fashioned glue on top, and get off my lawn.

You know he has not been charged with insurrection?

I've mostly played Callaway drivers going back to the Big Bertha; currently playing Mavrik, Heard good things about the TMs, and certainly lots of pros play them. I presume my next driver will be a carbon face; these Qi10s look interesting, maybe I'll give it a try.

Renewables seem to lack the fundamental oomph to be the primary source of power for large metro areas. Complimentary, sure. Of course, technologies advance, but it would take some revolutionary development to make it happen. Nuclear has that power and more, even current fission power. I have often said here that the lack of embracing nuclear is a sure reason to believe that the climate alarmists don't really want to solve the climate problem. Because if they did, we could pretty much do it with nuclear today.

I'm always left-leg first, although I'm right-handed all around, not like you lefty demon spawn. As I think about it, it probably evolved from being more comfortable on my right (dominant) leg as the one-legged base. When I did TKD, I tended to have my left leg in front, which is relatively uncommon for right-handers who prefer to kick with their dominant leg, but I preferred it as a solid base. Also I wasn't very good at TKD so...

I'm not sure why you think it would be so difficult to take a handoff. My slower speed would have a minimal time impact over the yard or two needed to get to the QB. If I'm getting hit before I get the ball, an NFL RB isn't going to fare much better. Have you ever watched American football?

Also I'm kinda thinking through this in a non-cancer sorta way. My laryngectomy left me with no left pectoral, breathing through a hole in my neck, and a weakened neck. On this last point, I'm honestly not sure my neck is strong enough to support the helmet, let alone take a hit from an NFL defender. So yeah, probably option 1.

That's silly, I could get the handoff. But you remind me of another question: what happens on a fumble? Because I'm confident that we'd have more than a few of those.

My heart wants me to try #2 but my brain says to take #1. I think I could get the 5 net yards, enough to risk it, but I don't think I could survive the 10+ hits. Chance of survival goes up for runs around the end, since you could probably control the hit a little better. Problem is, my lack of speed would offset the odds of gaining the yards. I'm convincing myself #1.

I've wondered how they make sure they contain the reaction. Obviously the smart people working on this have thought about it as well, but during the development of fission for the bomb they had to be very, very careful to not start an uncontrollable chain reaction. I very much hope that the people doing such analyses are the very best in their fields, and not diversity hires.

I have a classic Atari collection for my Switch. Asteroids, Centipede, and Millipede are probably the games I play the most. Missile Command and Defender are next tier.

The pope didn't say to accept gay marriages, he said you could bless people who were in them. What I've heard that has upset priests the most is that he basically left if very vague and up to the interpretation of the individual priest, which is very un-Catholic-like. But it is consistent with the theory I posed in my previous post, which is that a priest in the US may give such blessings more than a priest in middle of nowhere Africa.

Basically you ignored my entire post. Not surprising, from a person who knows more about how to worship God than Jesus did when he set Peter up to run his church. Well, I've enjoyed this riveting conversation, carry on.

This topic probably merits its own thread. Also, that's not exactly what he said. When Jesus set Peter up to lead his church, the one true church, the Catholic Church, he did so with the knowledge that God's message would need tweaking over time, but that it was impractical for him to return directly to earth for every instance. Jesus himself contradicted the old testament on many occasions, showing that God's message does indeed evolve as people grow over time. To think that all guidance for all time is contained in words from thousands of years ago doesn't make much sense. Regarding the pope's statement: religions are as much a prescription for a healthy culture as they are a worship of God. Most religions are against homosexuality, because historically such behavior was not good for a culture. It was important to bear many children because many of those died and those who survived were needed to work your land, and to create more children to grow the society. It is only very recently, and only in first world countries, where that has changed. The Catholic Church is global, and many of their constituents are not in a position to enjoy the "luxury" of homosexuality, so I doubt they will ever full endorse it. I believe that this statement from the pope is his attempt to have us "love the sinner" where it makes practical sense within the local culture.

I agree that in the US, Southern Baptists on average spend more time reading the Bible and shouting "Praise Jesus!" than their Catholic counterparts. It's unclear to me if that translates into more good deeds. I'm confident that the Catholic Church does more overall good on a global scale.

I'll need to look into the details, but on the surface this is extremely exciting news.

Funny, I'm a Catholic. Our church does a tremendous amount of good in the community which extends beyond the 1 hour on Sunday. I've got some good friends who are Southern Baptist. I remember hearing years ago from them that they decided to "accept" Catholics as Christians; I thought how nice of you, since Catholicism is the church established by Christ through Peter. Our very good friend and maid of honor in our wedding once seriously dated a Southern Baptist guy, who broke up with her because she wasn't Christian enough for her. My perception of Southern Baptists is that they are, not individually but as a sect, a collection of pompous dooshism which has decided (much like weepaws) that their particular sect is the only way to salvation.

I still don't get it. What is "all or nothing" to a "real" Christian? The Bible? If so, I disagree. If not, then what?

Got it. Where weepaws struggles is that he is a bible fundamentalist, in which case it is like you said, you are either all in or not. I've pointed out multiple contradictions in the bible to his worldview throughout this thread, which he basically ignores. I'd disagree with your general premise though, if I understand it. I think you can be a Christian and not be a 100% bible fundamentalist.