reevesr1

Amen to that, Don. I did vote, but picking a favorite was probably a waste of time. They are all great.

Glenn, That's fantastic. Hope I get to experience it someday.

You people are white almost beyond comprehension, and dat be da trooth, for sheezy!

Weedy 300K in 1982 would equate to 594K today. Here is a conversion site: Inflation Calculator

I think it's not kosher.

I took a break from the story of the week thing to give you poor folks a break. But I thought that since we can't catch fish right now, I'd try to scratch the itch a bit through a fish story, with a big setup... Now I don't know if ya'll remember from the stories this summer, but there is a bit of a gambling theme in my dad's family. One of the ways my dad gambled was bowling (don't laugh, bowling is a big deal in Texas). The main bowling alley in my home town was owned by one of my dad's best friends John. I worked for John one winter when I was in my first year of university (1980). I was working one Thursday night, and dad was there late Pot Bowling ($10 a man, usually 6-10 bowlers, winner takes the pot). Dad won way more than his fair share, so I don't know that you would call it gambling as much as getting paid. Anyway, I'm watching dad bowl and he turns to me and says "hey, go ask John if I can bum a cigarette." So I go back in the office and ask John, to which he replies "you go tell that SOB that I won't give him another smoke as long as he lives." Ok, I think. So I tell dad, he laughs and relays this story to me: Back in the early '60s, dad was out of work and was able to fish pretty much every day. But since he wasn't working, it could get to be a bit hard to justify the expense (at least to my mom). So he would invite a friends and bet on biggest fish, first fish, most fish, etc. Well, since dad was such a good fisherman, this, like the bowling wasn't much of a gamble. He wasn't making near enough to make up for the loss of a job, he was financing the trips. Well, one day he is fishing with John, and John hooks one of the biggest Speckled Trout my dad had ever seen. 30" and 9-10# of bad attitude. After several minutes, John gets the fish to the boat and just as dad starts to slip the net under, the hook pops out of the trouts mouth. But dad is quick enough with the net to catch the trout. He pulls the fish out of the water, says "nice fish" and tuns the net over and lets the fish go. John says "what the &%$* did you do that for?" Dad says, "well, since the hook popped out before I netted it, I figure I caught the fish. Since I didn't want there to be a big argument, I decided the best thing to do would be to let it go." John looks at him in disbelief and says a LOT of bad words. An hour or so later, dad is out of cigarettes. He asks John for a smoke, to which John replies "you SOB, I won't give you another smoke as long as you live." And he didn't. Dad did say that he always felt bad about letting that fish go. He never told John that however.

Sorry John, but we don't really talk about fishing around here anymore. It's just too depressing. I have never ice fished Mackenzie, but my bro in law lives there and he says it is really good. I know there are some big fish in there.

When my wife answered the phone and it was a telemarketer, she would act very excited about everything they would say. She would say "really, that's FANTASTIC" and "I can't believe it" all the while ramping up the excitement level. She says you could here the telemarketer getting excited as well. When they would say "would you like to purchase one?" She would say, in the exact same excited voice "absolutely not!" I actually felt sorry for the telemarketer. My wife would laugh for hours.

Where you gonna get the 1.21 Gigawatts from?

Lynn, I pinkie swear that I held out as long as I could. But I had to: I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin: String Theory and Black Holes

Taco, you just made me sad to realize how shallow and pointless my life has become. On a brighter note, looks like we have successfully hijacked the poll!

Al, I thought you went home to work? Get off the internet.

I said Jet Boat, but my favorite was the big trout streamer thread. Edit: And I had totally forgotten the salmon egg story. Explains one of DBT's comments in the Global Warming thread. I noticed there's been more activity on the 'ole GW thread. Looks like fun for me tonite!!

Rich, I was pretty excited when I saw your name as most recent post. Thought to myself, "this oughta be fun, wongrs will come armed with logic, facts, and a leave the world in a better place than you found it attitude. More fireworks!!" Instead, I get a blatant appeal to the most base Canadian emotion, ie, your favorite hockey team. An unabashed effort to hijack the post. Spoilsport. Oh well, this thread has probably run its course anyway. Fun while it lasted.

You know, I could respect you guys for hitting the Bow at -15. But you actually drove 2.5 hrs for the privilege of fishing in -15. You boys is nuts!

Now THAT's fishing! Big baits and circle hooks! Man, I need to get home.....

mvdoag, I tried to bring existentialism into the argument, but no one bit! Also, ever notice how the "zealots" almost always tend to take the side of an argument other than the side you (not you personally) are on? Is that a law of nature or something?

Sun, I have been "trained" in University as well, with honors and everything. Big deal. That and $2.50 will get me a coffee at Starbucks. CO2 is not pollution. Granted. So what? We are releasing it into the atmosphere at a much higher than natural rate. It could very well be contributing to a unnatural heating of our planet. You say that is is a blip in geologic time. Again, granted. So tell me when I should be alarmed. At what rate would it be too high? Who decides? From what I understand temperature is rising at long term historic rates (and I mean geologic time). Wouldn't it be a bit naive to think that we don't have something to do with it. Odds would be pretty small that we just happen to be living in a time of historic rising temp combined with a large unnatural release of CO2 and the two not be somehow related. I've spent most of my life troubleshooting equipment, processes, systems. I've done reliability studies, risk assessments, hazard analysis. I like to think from these I have developed a pretty open mind about things as well. But I also have developed a sense (and I grant that it is unscientific) a sense of when things feel right. Not unerring, but pretty accurate (should I call it a model?). I have learned that when things seem too coincidental they almost always are. The rising CO2 levels from burning fossil fuels combined with rapid temperature rise is pretty coincidental. I do agree that this does not necessarily mean the two are related. Again, as I said before, my bet is they are. Finally, just because the media believes it doesn't make it wrong. (Though having the media agree with it certainly detracts from it's credence). Edit: Oh and the risk management part of your post about not leaving the garage and all that: Risk is a combination of severity, likelihood, and number of people affected. In this case, likelihood is certainly still being debated. Severity as well, but it could be catastrophic (or multi-catastrophic depending how big your matrix is). Number of people affected is everyone. So how long do I wait for the debate to end so I can assign an intelligent number to likelihood? How many studies?

I saw JP Sartre's grave in Paris. He wouldn't have cared. None of it matters anyway. Saw you lurking down there by the way Weedy. Glad to see you make an appearance!

Dude, if you could put a picture of a 24K Jet Boat on top of that pile of eggs, that would be sweet! While we are at it, don't forget, if you want to catch BIG fish, use streamers. I'm getting cramps from all this stirring.

Oh, let's get started on THAT!!!! Talk about stirring the pot! Evolution is a theory that has never scientifically been disproved. Hogwash to many religious types because it doesn't fit their belief system, not because they can disprove it. Speaking as a religious type myself, I don't have any problem with evolution. I figure God is a pretty smart fella. If He wanted things to evolve, then he could probably pull it off. He is God, after all.

So how about a triple SJW rig, tipped with esleech's egg pattern? I plan to rig some up riding in a model float plane into Fortress Lake. At least in theory....

Agree with the first part, not so much with the second part. Gravity is a theory. Relativity is a theory. Evolution is a theory. For something to be called a theory, in the scientific sense, means it has been tested time and time again and always works. Once it doesn't work, it ain't a theory any more. Models are predictive. A theory says "here is what the outcome WILL be" models say "here is what the outcome MAY be, plus or minus some value". Or at least, I think that's what they mean. Finally, debate with me all you want. I don't think your a prick at all. Or at least not right now

and I'm thinking of using a triple SJW pattern next year, all with nice big wide gap hooks. I'll be a foul hooking, eye putting out, fish catching machine! Stir, stir, stir the pot Use a nice big stick Merrily, merrily, merrily I am such a prick

Disagree. Depends on what you are talking about. Can models predict that it will rain 2 weeks from today at 4 pm? No. Can models predict long term temperature trends? Maybe. Again, back to causality. Just because trying to predict weather led to the discovery of chaos theory, doesn't mean weather is chaotic. Just because we don't fully understand all of the variables (and i'm willing to concede we may never) does not mean we cannot come up with models that factor in what we do understand and make predictions based on them. Of course the more things you don't understand lead to more error in the answer. Doesn't necessarily mean the model is 'wrong'. We don't really understand gravity. But we can model the hell out of it. "My cast could be going straight, but theirs a slight tick in my cast, bam, its not where i thought it was going" Again, maybe. But most times it goes where you think it should. Not exactly, but close. And we understand way more about quantum mechanics than we did 50 years ago. How? By making models, disproving, making another model, disproving, etc.