"Lew Hodgett" wrote
> "Lee Michaels" wrote:
>
>> We just don't want to deal with the snow, mooses and penguins. <G>
>
>
> Penguins?
>
> Aren't penguins limited to the Southern hemisphere?
>
> I thought it was polar bears.
>
Just funnin' ya. I knew that would get a rise out of Robatoy.
Just for the record, what is the difference between a polar bear and a
penguin?
"jo4hn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> jo4hn wrote:
>> Is this rec.comedycentral?
>> Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>> mahalo,
>> jo4hn
> And look at it this way (tilting head steeply to the right): I am in NO
> direct danger from tsunamis!
>
Which raises the question, would a well timed/placed tsunami put out the
California fires?
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:13:40 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Is this rec.comedycentral?
>Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
>http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>
> mahalo,
> jo4hn
6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. The Martin Mars looks like a
apartment block in the sky. The 415 is regular size aircraft. I dont
think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and a
possible sale of both aircraft.
Owen
In article <[email protected]>, Lee Michaels
<leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote
> >
> Yea, yea, yea, I know David... if it isn't American it ain't worth a
> fuck, eh?
> ====================
>
> We just don't want to deal with the snow, mooses and penguins. <G>
Talk to Lyle Lovett about penguins...
In article <[email protected]>, Lee Michaels
<leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote:
> Just for the record, what is the difference between a polar bear and a
> penguin?
Try plucking a polar bear...
In article <[email protected]>, HeyBub
<[email protected]> wrote:
> four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
> fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
One a day is "low"?
Wow.
Where I live, one a MONTH is reason for concern.
In article <[email protected]>, Ed
Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote in message
> news:060920092204574682%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca...
> > In article <[email protected]>, HeyBub
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
> >> fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
> >
> > One a day is "low"?
> >
> > Wow.
> >
> > Where I live, one a MONTH is reason for concern.
>
> Where I live, one in 15 years is a concern.
I meant in my city, not my house, Ed.
;-)
Dave Balderstone wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, HeyBub
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
>> fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
>
> One a day is "low"?
Well, yeah. "Homicide" is the killing of one human by the agency of another.
"Homicide," per se, is not illegal. Murder is one kind of homicide (the
illegal kind) - self-defense is another (the meritorious kind)*.
Most of the homicide victims in my town needed killing, so it's not as bad
as it seems at first blush.
>
> Wow.
>
> Where I live, one a MONTH is reason for concern.
I envy you. You've evidently gotten the ratio of do-bads to uprights down to
the nuisance level.
Here, the maxim "The penis is mightier than the sword" (your enemies can
breed faster than you can kill them) is on display (the axiom, not the
penis).
-------------------------------
* Texas Penal Code 9.42 DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land
or tangible, movable property:
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing
burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from
escaping with the property;
Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) ... a person is justified in using force
against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use
or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was
immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be
reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force
was used:
(A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter
unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or
place of business or employment;
[..]
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder,
sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
> Which raises the question, would a well timed/placed tsunami put out the
> California fires?
Considering the height of some of those mountains, you'd probably do better
to smash an asteroid into the nearby ocean and raise a wall of water to put
out the fires. Then everybody can suffocate from the dust cloud.
Hypothetically speaking of course.
On Sep 5, 6:00=A0pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
> or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
>
That would leave Canada. Sorry.
On 9/4/2009 6:06 PM Lew Hodgett spake thus:
> "jo4hn" wrote:
>
> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>
>> Great photos.When you consider the "Station" fire burned 145,000
>> acres, claimed twolives along with several seriousinjuries, it is
>> amazing it wasn't worse.It has been determined to be arson which
>> means homicide.Since federal land is involved, US attorney will be
>> a player.
I've got a slightly different take on this.
Rather than focus on how eeevil the fire-starter is (if this actually
was arson) and getting all worked up about opening up a can of
retribution on his ass, how about rethinking the whole idea of whether
tens of thousands of people should be living in such urban-forest
interface areas?
Maybe it's not such a great ideas interspersing things that must be
protected from fire--people, expensive houses, livestock--in areas that
are always going to burn, one way or the other?
To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd be
on their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair, if I
were Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period, during which
the federal government would assist people to move from flood-prone
areas, while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and property
replacement. After that, there would be no such assistance, apart from
rescuing poor souls who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong
time and got swept away in a raging torrent.)
[1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and the
eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of "when".
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 2:11 PM Mark & Juanita spake thus:
> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>
>> To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
>> areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
>> permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd be
>> on their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair, if I
>> were Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period, during which
>> the federal government would assist people to move from flood-prone
>> areas, while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and property
>> replacement. After that, there would be no such assistance, apart from
>> rescuing poor souls who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong
>> time and got swept away in a raging torrent.)
>
> This all sounds good on paper. Follow it to its logical conclusion: OK,
> then we shouldn't let people build near where hurricanes are known to
> periodically cause destruction. Nor should people build near rivers that
> flood periodically. Ditto for areas prone to tornados. The entire western
> 1/2 of California should be off-limits because of the threat of
> earthquakes. Start marking out a map with all of these exclusionary zones.
> Pretty soon, you've got a full map of exclusionary zones and nowhere to
> live. The key is managing the risk in the areas where people do live and
> working to minimize potential impacts.
Well, admittedly my plan still has a few bugs in it that need to be
worked out. It's currently in front of the Revolutionary Council for
rewriting.
But seriously, earthquakes, and maybe even tornadoes and cyclones are
valid concerns. Certainly I'd say that if one lives in an
earthquake-prone area as I do, then all buildings *should* be required
to meet certain seismic specifications. If they do, there should be a
way to cover them against damages (insurance of various kinds). If they
don't, then the owner shouldn't be compensated in the event the damn
building falls down.
Even this is impractical, given the huge number of unsafe occupied
buildings in the Bay Area, but you gotta start somewhere.
And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 3:11 PM Robatoy spake thus:
> On Sep 5, 6:00 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
>> or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
>
> That would leave Canada. Sorry.
Ack. I *knew* there was a show-stopper!
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 3:06 PM CW spake thus:
> "David Nebenzahl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> .
>>
>> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
>
> Yes, the government should encourage the abandonment of the nations farm
> land.
Well, farms and small towns are one thing; large population centers are
another.
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
> On Sep 5, 6:20 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 9/5/2009 3:11 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>>
>> > On Sep 5, 6:00 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
>> >> or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
>>
>> > That would leave Canada. Sorry.
>>
>> Ack. I *knew* there was a show-stopper!
>>
> Yea, yea, yea, I know David... if it isn't American it ain't worth a
> fuck, eh?
Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twisted
up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you (in
other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one of
the "USA über alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 3:57 PM Robatoy spake thus:
> On Sep 5, 6:54 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
>> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twisted
>> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you (in
>> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one of
>> the "USA über alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>
> Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
> card.
Ouch!
Or the Alex Trebek card, the Richard Dreyfuss card, the Martin Short
card, the SCTV card, etc., etc.
(Anyone except Gordon Lightfoot. That one you can keep.)
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/5/2009 4:11 PM FrozenNorth spake thus:
> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>
>> On 9/5/2009 3:57 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>>
>>> On Sep 5, 6:54 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>>>
>>>> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twisted
>>>> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you (in
>>>> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one of
>>>> the "USA über alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>>>
>>> Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
>>> card.
>>
>> Ouch!
>>
>> Or the Alex Trebek card, the Richard Dreyfuss card, the Martin Short
>> card, the SCTV card, etc., etc.
>
> What does Richard Dreyfuss have to do with Canada?
What, indeed; I was confusing his role as a Jewish kid from Montreal in
"The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz" with his life.
Ten lashes with a wet noodle for me, and I'll go watch a hockey game, eh.
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On 9/6/2009 5:51 PM HeyBub spake thus:
> 95% of the deaths attributed to hurricane Katrina, for instance, came in the
> years after the storm as 150,000 New Orleans goblins invaded Houston (250
> murders in 1998, 400 in 2006)..
>
> Fortunately, these itinerant squints killed each other off with some
> regularity, and now, four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
> fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
"Bub", I only hope that someday you venture into the wrong neighborhood,
and that my homies encounter you, beat the living shit out of you, and
cut out your black heart.
You're a worthless piece of shit, you fucking racist!
--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
On Sep 5, 7:23=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "cavelamb" wrote:
> > One last correction (?).
>
> > If if has wheels it is amphibious.
>
> > If not, it's a flying boat.
>
> It's a flying boat, at least per the media.
>
> Lew
It's a flying boat. Period.
And not to 'Stein' the discussion, the 'real' meaning of amphibious
is:
Etymology: Greek amphibios, literally, living a double life, from
amphi- + bios mode of life
That means, IMHO, that all airplanes are amphibious. N'est pas?
On Sep 5, 7:11=A0pm, FrozenNorth <[email protected]>
wrote:
> David Nebenzahl wrote:
> > On 9/5/2009 3:57 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> >> On Sep 5, 6:54 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> >>> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twiste=
d
> >>> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you =
(in
> >>> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one o=
f
> >>> the "USA =FCber alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>
> >> Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
> >> card.
>
> > Ouch!
>
> > Or the Alex Trebek card, the Richard Dreyfuss card, the Martin Short
> > card, the SCTV card, etc., etc.
>
> > (Anyone except Gordon Lightfoot. That one you can keep.)
>
> What does Richard Dreyfuss have to do with Canada?
>
> I'll unleash the Jim Carrey card if you aren't careful.
>
> --
> Froz...
To hell with this... I'm raising to 'Shatner' level.....
On Sep 5, 6:20=A0pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/5/2009 3:11 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> > On Sep 5, 6:00 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
> >> or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
>
> > That would leave Canada. Sorry.
>
> Ack. I *knew* there was a show-stopper!
>
Yea, yea, yea, I know David... if it isn't American it ain't worth a
fuck, eh?
On Sep 5, 3:17=A0pm, Owen Robb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:13:40 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Is this rec.comedycentral?
> >Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
> >http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_califo...
>
> > =A0 =A0mahalo,
> > =A0 =A0jo4hn
>
> 6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
> Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. =A0The Martin Mars looks like a
> apartment block in the sky. =A0The 415 is regular size aircraft. =A0I don=
t
> think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and a
> possible sale of both aircraft.
>
> Owen
Maybe it is a Mars after all?
http://www.examiner.com/x-11680-Wildfire-Examiner~y2009m9d3-Video-of-Martin=
-Mars-dropping-on-Mt-Wilson
David Nebenzahl wrote:
> On 9/5/2009 3:57 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
>> On Sep 5, 6:54 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>>
>>> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twisted
>>> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you (in
>>> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one of
>>> the "USA über alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>>
>> Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
>> card.
>
> Ouch!
>
> Or the Alex Trebek card, the Richard Dreyfuss card, the Martin Short
> card, the SCTV card, etc., etc.
>
> (Anyone except Gordon Lightfoot. That one you can keep.)
>
>
What does Richard Dreyfuss have to do with Canada?
I'll unleash the Jim Carrey card if you aren't careful.
--
Froz...
"Lee Michaels" wrote:
> Just for the record, what is the difference between a polar bear and
> a penguin?
Try SIZE.
Back about 1980-1985, the Holiday Inn in Moline, Il, had a stuffed
polar bear up on it's hind legs in the lobby.
The ceilings in the lobby were at 2nd story level, and needed to be to
accomodate the bear.
He was one BIG dude.
Maybe 6-8 penguins stacked on top of each other might have gotten to
the shoulder of that bear.
Lew
David Nebenzahl wrote:
> On 9/6/2009 5:51 PM HeyBub spake thus:
>
>> 95% of the deaths attributed to hurricane Katrina, for instance,
>> came in the years after the storm as 150,000 New Orleans goblins
>> invaded Houston (250 murders in 1998, 400 in 2006)..
>>
>> Fortunately, these itinerant squints killed each other off with some
>> regularity, and now, four years later, we are getting back to our
>> usual, fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
>
> "Bub", I only hope that someday you venture into the wrong
> neighborhood, and that my homies encounter you, beat the living shit
> out of you, and cut out your black heart.
>
> You're a worthless piece of shit, you fucking racist!
You are correct - there are neighborhoods filled with the lawless, the
immoral, the drug-addled. Normal folk avoid those venues inasmuch as they
are populated by people with no regard for the manners of civil society.
Righteous, God-fearing, and productive members of society avoid such
pestilential pits of perdition.
Houston tried, really hard, to return the courtesies shown us for so many
years by the citizens of New Orleans. We welcomed the refugees - provided
food, clothing, shelter, schools, and jobs. We learned a hard lesson. When
hurricane Yikes came along, ad hoc vigilance committees were formed to erect
signs on the Interstate linking Houston and New Orleans: "This way to San
Antonio."
In the unhappy event I do find myself in such a situation as you describe -
and which you encourage - I guarantee I'll take some of them with me.
Probably only one, though - when the first falls, I'm confident the rats
will scurry.
As for being a racist, that's absurd. Some of my best friends live next door
to colored people.
J. Clarke wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>> Anyway,
>> this is worth a look or two:
>>>>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>>> Except that that most assuredly _IS_ a Martin Mars. The Canadair
>>> 415 is a twin engine aircraft with a swept vertical stabilizer--the
>>> aircraft shown was a four engined aircraft (you can see two engines
>>> on the near wing) with
>>> a non-swept vertical stabilizer--further, the color scheme is that
>>> that Flying Tankers uses on the Hawaii Mars.
>> But what runway did he take off from?
>
> It don't _need_ no steenkeeng _runway_.
>
Did you notice how little lake was left when if finally got airborne?
There's some pucker for ya!
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:060920092204574682%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca...
> In article <[email protected]>, HeyBub
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
>> fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
>
> One a day is "low"?
>
> Wow.
>
> Where I live, one a MONTH is reason for concern.
Where I live, one in 15 years is a concern.
"David Nebenzahl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> .
>
> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado Row
Yes, the government should encourage the abandonment of the nations farm
land.
David Nebenzahl wrote:
> On 9/4/2009 6:06 PM Lew Hodgett spake thus:
>
>> "jo4hn" wrote:
> >
>>
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
> >
>>> Great photos.When you consider the "Station" fire burned 145,000
>>> acres, claimed twolives along with several seriousinjuries, it is
>>> amazing it wasn't worse.It has been determined to be arson which
>>> means homicide.Since federal land is involved, US attorney will be
>>> a player.
>
> I've got a slightly different take on this.
>
> Rather than focus on how eeevil the fire-starter is (if this actually
> was arson) and getting all worked up about opening up a can of
> retribution on his ass, how about rethinking the whole idea of whether
> tens of thousands of people should be living in such urban-forest
> interface areas?
>
> Maybe it's not such a great ideas interspersing things that must be
> protected from fire--people, expensive houses, livestock--in areas that
> are always going to burn, one way or the other?
>
> To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
> areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
> permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd be
> on their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair, if I
> were Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period, during which
> the federal government would assist people to move from flood-prone
> areas, while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and property
> replacement. After that, there would be no such assistance, apart from
> rescuing poor souls who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong
> time and got swept away in a raging torrent.)
>
>
This all sounds good on paper. Follow it to its logical conclusion: OK,
then we shouldn't let people build near where hurricanes are known to
periodically cause destruction. Nor should people build near rivers that
flood periodically. Ditto for areas prone to tornados. The entire western
1/2 of California should be off-limits because of the threat of
earthquakes. Start marking out a map with all of these exclusionary zones.
Pretty soon, you've got a full map of exclusionary zones and nowhere to
live. The key is managing the risk in the areas where people do live and
working to minimize potential impacts.
> [1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
> ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and the
> eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of "when".
>
>
--
There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage
Rob Leatham
David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On 9/4/2009 6:06 PM Lew Hodgett spake thus:
>
>> "jo4hn" wrote:
> >
>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_califo
>> rn.html
> >
>>> Great photos.When you consider the "Station" fire burned 145,000
>>> acres, claimed twolives along with several seriousinjuries, it is
>>> amazing it wasn't worse.It has been determined to be arson which
>>> means homicide.Since federal land is involved, US attorney will be
>>> a player.
>
> I've got a slightly different take on this.
>
> Rather than focus on how eeevil the fire-starter is (if this actually
> was arson) and getting all worked up about opening up a can of
> retribution on his ass, how about rethinking the whole idea of whether
> tens of thousands of people should be living in such urban-forest
> interface areas?
>
> Maybe it's not such a great ideas interspersing things that must be
> protected from fire--people, expensive houses, livestock--in areas
> that are always going to burn, one way or the other?
>
> To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
> areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
> permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd
> be on their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair,
> if I were Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period,
> during which the federal government would assist people to move from
> flood-prone areas, while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and
> property replacement. After that, there would be no such assistance,
> apart from rescuing poor souls who happened to be in the wrong place
> at the wrong time and got swept away in a raging torrent.)
>
>
> [1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
> ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and
> the eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of
> "when".
I hear you, and enerally agree. However, if the firebug really knew what
he was doing, he should get seriously "burned" and get effective
punishment. At least 10 years in a not so nice prison.
Then the fire insurance in those areas shoul go up a bit.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
On Sep 6, 6:18=A0am, "Leon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "David Nebenzahl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
>
>
> > I've got a slightly different take on this.
>
> > Rather than focus on how eeevil the fire-starter is (if this actually w=
as
> > arson) and getting all worked up about opening up a can of retribution =
on
> > his ass, how about rethinking the whole idea of whether tens of thousan=
ds
> > of people should be living in such urban-forest interface areas?
>
> > Maybe it's not such a great ideas interspersing things that must be
> > protected from fire--people, expensive houses, livestock--in areas that
> > are always going to burn, one way or the other?
>
> > To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
> > areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
> > permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd be=
on
> > their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair, if I wer=
e
> > Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period, during which the
> > federal government would assist people to move from flood-prone areas,
> > while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and property replacement. Af=
ter
> > that, there would be no such assistance, apart from rescuing poor souls
> > who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and got swept a=
way
> > in a raging torrent.)
>
> > [1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
> > ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and th=
e
> > eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of "when"=
.
>
> Well actually most any where can flood. =A0Regardless of where you live
> something can get you. =A0Hurricanes, tornados, blizzards, earth quakes, =
sink
> holes, etc.
> IMHO your are always in some kind of danger. =A0Having lived through seve=
ral
> disasters I believe the best you can do is live in a less populated area.
> The advantage to this is that when a disaster does hit, you are not in li=
ne
> behind 2,000,000 other people with the same problem.
> IMHO the biggest problem with living in a heavily populated disaster area=
is
> that it takes "for ever" =A0to get =A0things back to normal.
Blizzards???!!!! In the same vein as hurricanes & tornadoes &
earthquakes????!!! Why not add thunderstorms and sunburn, while you're
at it?
Sorry, blizzards are just big snowstorms. A couple of days &
everything is cleaned up.
Luigi
On Sep 5, 7:44=A0pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/5/2009 4:11 PM FrozenNorth spake thus:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > David Nebenzahl wrote:
>
> >> On 9/5/2009 3:57 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> >>> On Sep 5, 6:54 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> >>>> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twist=
ed
> >>>> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you=
(in
> >>>> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one =
of
> >>>> the "USA =FCber alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>
> >>> Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
> >>> card.
>
> >> Ouch!
>
> >> Or the Alex Trebek card, the Richard Dreyfuss card, the Martin Short
> >> card, the SCTV card, etc., etc.
>
> > What does Richard Dreyfuss have to do with Canada?
>
> What, indeed; I was confusing his role as a Jewish kid from Montreal in
> "The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz" with his life.
>
> Ten lashes with a wet noodle for me, and I'll go watch a hockey game, eh.
>
> --
> Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism
Jewish kid from Montreal? You mean Leonard Cohen? *S*
(I saw him in concert a few months back...and he makes amateurs like
Lightfoot look like a high-school act.)
"jo4hn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Is this rec.comedycentral?
> Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>
> mahalo,
> jo4hn
Sad to say, but the photographs are just incredible.
"jo4hn" wrote:
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.htmlGreat photos.When you consider the "Station" fire burned 145,000 acres, claimed twolives along with several seriousinjuries, it is amazing it wasn't worse.It has been determined to be arson which means homicide.Since federal land is involved, US attorney will be a player.Lew
On Sep 5, 8:24=A0pm, Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_Sbalderstone.ca>
wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Lee Michaels
>
> <leemichaels*[email protected]> wrote:
> > Just for the record, what is the difference between a polar bear and a
> > penguin?
>
> Try plucking a polar bear...
*giving my head a shake*..... Ohhhhh *PLUCKING!!!*****
On Sep 5, 4:20=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 3:17=A0pm, Owen Robb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:13:40 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Is this rec.comedycentral?
> > >Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
> > >http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_califo.=
..
>
> > > =A0 =A0mahalo,
> > > =A0 =A0jo4hn
>
> > 6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
> > Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. =A0The Martin Mars looks like a
> > apartment block in the sky. =A0The 415 is regular size aircraft. =A0I d=
ont
> > think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and a
> > possible sale of both aircraft.
>
> > Owen
>
> Maybe it is a Mars after all?
>
> http://www.examiner.com/x-11680-Wildfire-Examiner~y2009m9d3-Video-of-...
The 415 is a twin engine. This Mars has 4.
On Sep 5, 6:54=A0pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/5/2009 3:46 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 5, 6:20 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> On 9/5/2009 3:11 PM Robatoy spake thus:
>
> >> > On Sep 5, 6:00 pm, David Nebenzahl <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado =
Row
> >> >> or Hurricane Alley; economic disincentives, etc. ...
>
> >> > That would leave Canada. Sorry.
>
> >> Ack. I *knew* there was a show-stopper!
>
> > Yea, yea, yea, I know David... if it isn't American it ain't worth a
> > fuck, eh?
>
> Hmmm, between yours and mine, not sure which way the irony got twisted
> up there. If you're saying that sarcastically, then I agree with you (in
> other words, let's not treat Canada as our new colony). I'm not one of
> the "USA =FCber alles" crowd here. Are we OK now?
>
Well, at least you're not forcing me to play the Celine Dijon [sic]
card.
=3D0)
Owen Robb wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:13:40 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Is this rec.comedycentral?
>> Anyway, this is worth a look or two:
>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>>
>> mahalo,
>> jo4hn
> 6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
> Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. The Martin Mars looks like a
> apartment block in the sky. The 415 is regular size aircraft. I dont
> think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and a
> possible sale of both aircraft.
Except that that most assuredly _IS_ a Martin Mars. The Canadair 415 is a
twin engine aircraft with a swept vertical stabilizer--the aircraft shown
was a four engined aircraft (you can see two engines on the near wing) with
a non-swept vertical stabilizer--further, the color scheme is that that
Flying Tankers uses on the Hawaii Mars.
It's not an SH-5--that has twin tails. Not a ShinMeiwa--that has a T-tail.
I don't think there _are_ any other four-engine flying boats still in
service. So that leaves the Mars.
CW wrote:
> "David Nebenzahl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> .
>>
>> And maybe folks should be persuaded to live elsewhere than Tornado
>> Row
>
>
> Yes, the government should encourage the abandonment of the nations
> farm land.
Alternatively, if people _have_ to live there, tornado-proof structures
should be developed for the purpose.
Of course people are sometimes incredibly stupid about such things--I never
will forget a bunch of engineers at Enormous Aerospace lining the windows
watching a tornado coming right at the building. Personally I found a 20
foot thick reinforced concrete slab to hide under. Fortunately the tornado
missed the building.
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> "J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>> Anyway,
> this is worth a look or two:
>>>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>
>>
>> Except that that most assuredly _IS_ a Martin Mars. The Canadair
>> 415 is a twin engine aircraft with a swept vertical stabilizer--the
>> aircraft shown was a four engined aircraft (you can see two engines
>> on the near wing) with
>> a non-swept vertical stabilizer--further, the color scheme is that
>> that Flying Tankers uses on the Hawaii Mars.
>
> But what runway did he take off from?
It don't _need_ no steenkeeng _runway_.
Luigi Zanasi wrote:
>>> [1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
>>> ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and the
>>> eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of "when"..
>> Well actually most any where can flood. Regardless of where you live
>> something can get you. Hurricanes, tornados, blizzards, earth quakes, sink
>> holes, etc.
>> IMHO your are always in some kind of danger. Having lived through several
>> disasters I believe the best you can do is live in a less populated area.
>> The advantage to this is that when a disaster does hit, you are not in line
>> behind 2,000,000 other people with the same problem.
>> IMHO the biggest problem with living in a heavily populated disaster area is
>> that it takes "for ever" to get things back to normal.
>
> Blizzards???!!!! In the same vein as hurricanes & tornadoes &
> earthquakes????!!! Why not add thunderstorms and sunburn, while you're
> at it?
>
> Sorry, blizzards are just big snowstorms. A couple of days &
> everything is cleaned up.
>
> Luigi
It's interesting, though. In my part of the country, we have some minor
earthquakes, a few isolated tornadoes, and the plagues of winter, ice
and snow.
Living in an earthquake zone and/or a hurricane area would not be my
first choice, but I can see those from Florida or California being
aghast with having to deal with 30 below and a two foot snow drop.
Blizzards and cold are surefire killers if you're not ready for them, as
are earthquakes and hurricanes. Luigi, you're in NWT or YK IIRC, and I'm
sure you have all the gear to survive a tough winter. So do I. With us,
it's just the passing of seasons. To others, it might well be hell.
Mostly it boils down to preparedness,.
Tanus
"David Nebenzahl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> I've got a slightly different take on this.
>
> Rather than focus on how eeevil the fire-starter is (if this actually was
> arson) and getting all worked up about opening up a can of retribution on
> his ass, how about rethinking the whole idea of whether tens of thousands
> of people should be living in such urban-forest interface areas?
>
> Maybe it's not such a great ideas interspersing things that must be
> protected from fire--people, expensive houses, livestock--in areas that
> are always going to burn, one way or the other?
>
> To me, it's the same situation with folks who live in perennial flood
> areas.[1] In a sane and just world, people just simply wouldn't be
> permitted to build there in the first place. Or if they were, they'd be on
> their own so far as compensating any losses went. (To be fair, if I were
> Ayatollah, I'd start a 5 or 10 year relocation period, during which the
> federal government would assist people to move from flood-prone areas,
> while continuing to pay for rescue efforts and property replacement. After
> that, there would be no such assistance, apart from rescuing poor souls
> who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and got swept away
> in a raging torrent.)
>
>
> [1] Same applies to the complete idiots who let people build houses on
> ocean cliffs, like here in Daly City and Pacifica, where erosion and the
> eventual swallowing up by the sea are not matters of "if" but of "when".
Well actually most any where can flood. Regardless of where you live
something can get you. Hurricanes, tornados, blizzards, earth quakes, sink
holes, etc.
IMHO your are always in some kind of danger. Having lived through several
disasters I believe the best you can do is live in a less populated area.
The advantage to this is that when a disaster does hit, you are not in line
behind 2,000,000 other people with the same problem.
IMHO the biggest problem with living in a heavily populated disaster area is
that it takes "for ever" to get things back to normal.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Owen Robb" wrote:
>
>> 6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
>> Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. The Martin Mars looks like a
>> apartment block in the sky. The 415 is regular size aircraft. I
>> dont
>> think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and
>> a
>> possible sale of both aircraft.
>
> Correction:
>
> The Mars is a 4 piston engine aircraft of 1940ish vintage is an
> amphibious aircraft that is spending the summer on Lake Ellsinore.
One last correction (?).
If if has wheels it is amphibious.
If not, it's a flying boat.
>
> It was used specificifically where a high capacity water drop was
> needed.
>
> It was amazing to watch that bad boy refill and then climb back into
> the sky.
>
> There are also a pair of 415's on lease from Quebec.
>
> Every little bit helps.
>
> Lew
>
>
>
Tanus wrote:
>
> Living in an earthquake zone and/or a hurricane area would not be my
> first choice, but I can see those from Florida or California being
> aghast with having to deal with 30 below and a two foot snow drop.
>
Hurricanes cause very, very few deaths.
95% of the deaths attributed to hurricane Katrina, for instance, came in the
years after the storm as 150,000 New Orleans goblins invaded Houston (250
murders in 1998, 400 in 2006)..
Fortunately, these itinerant squints killed each other off with some
regularity, and now, four years later, we are getting back to our usual,
fairly low, homicide rate (336 in 2008).
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>> Anyway, this is
worth a look or two:
>>> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html
>
> Except that that most assuredly _IS_ a Martin Mars. The Canadair 415 is a
> twin engine aircraft with a swept vertical stabilizer--the aircraft shown
> was a four engined aircraft (you can see two engines on the near wing)
> with
> a non-swept vertical stabilizer--further, the color scheme is that that
> Flying Tankers uses on the Hawaii Mars.
But what runway did he take off from?
"Owen Robb" wrote:
> 6th pic down, Its not a Martin Mars its a Bombardier Canadair 415
> Superscooper Amphibious Aircraft. The Martin Mars looks like a
> apartment block in the sky. The 415 is regular size aircraft. I
> dont
> think that the Mars will leave BC this year due to lack of parts and
> a
> possible sale of both aircraft.
Correction:
The Mars is a 4 piston engine aircraft of 1940ish vintage is an
amphibious aircraft that is spending the summer on Lake Ellsinore.
It was used specificifically where a high capacity water drop was
needed.
It was amazing to watch that bad boy refill and then climb back into
the sky.
There are also a pair of 415's on lease from Quebec.
Every little bit helps.
Lew