Jump to content

KirtFalcon

Members
  • Posts

    47,656
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    348

Everything posted by KirtFalcon

  1. KirtFalcon

    Rummy

    Rumsfeld is probably the best Secretary of Defense we have had in the past 100 years. The anti-war crowd aided by the liberal media has tried demonize him and the entire Iraq operation from the beginning. His role directing military operations has been stellar. Most of what has gone wrong in Iraq has not been with military strategy, it's been after the major military operation was over and is mostly due to problems with rebuilding Iraq and helping them form a government . . . hardly the sole responsibility of the Secretary of Defense. These retired generals speaking out now I guarantee you are in the minority when compared to all the operational commanders in the active military and retired. Many of them are doing so for political or personal reasons not unlike Wesley Clark and other retired generals turned liberal politicians. :whistle:
  2. Ace's days are numbered! :w00t: I think it's going to come down to Kellie, Chris and Taylor, although I think Katherine is the best singer. Chris is over rated in my opinion, but it's probably because I don't like the rocker type. Elliott is the best male singer but he isn't much to look at. :whistle: My pick for the 2006 winner is Kellie Pickler! I think she is more talented than Carrie Underwood. :w00t:
  3. I think a lot of politicians have also been intimidated by the environmental nutcases about global warming It's time the truth get out on the global warming "junk science" myth! :w00t:
  4. I have been cooking barbecue for over 30 years. I consider myself quite the "que-master" and have tried everything over the years . . . charcoal, various types of wood, gas. What you use for "fuel" is not nearly as important as HOW you do it! I have seen people "mess up" some good meat with everything from charcoal to gas and I have tasted delicious barbecue cooked on gas, wood and charcoal grills. Those of you who are "bashing" gas grilling don't have a clue. I actually prefer using a gas grill in combination with lava rocks and various types of wood. A well designed gas grilling system is much easier to regulate the temperature with and provides just as much flavor as charcoal or wood grilling alone. I currently have a home-made pit that has an old gas hot water heater burner and a wood box system that provides direct or indirect heat based on what I'm cooking. The bottom rack is lined with lava rocks that catches all the drippings and provides wonderful flavor. I put a couple of sticks of wood in the wood box that is directly above the gas burner and I can cook as much or little with wood as I want. I generally let the wood burn down after providing all the smoke that is needed and then let the gas slow cook the meat for whatever time is needed. This is much easier than trying to regulate the temperature with wood or charcoal alone. I could also use charcoal in the wood box if I wanted to. If you are going to live somewhere for a long time, I highly recommend building this type of "combination" system to grill! :w00t:
  5. I couldn't disagree more with that statement. There are a lot of uneducateduninformed people that vote based on emotion without really understanding the issues. Millions of people only casually pay attention to the news and politics and in my opinion aren't qualified to cast an intelligent vote. They only start paying attention to elections and candidates a few months before elections and are easily swayed by the liberal media who can't be trusted to cover the issues fairly. I would rather these people stay home rather than cast an uninformed vote! :w00t::whistle::w00t:
  6. The initial reports I have seen the past week seem to think it is completely bogus and the guy promoting this is out for publicity and $$$. Only time and further examination will tell but I doubt if it much ever becomes of this "revelation". My opinion is that it will be thoroughly debunked by most legitimate biblical scholars. :whistle:
  7. I think the Astros are as good as anybody in the National League. I predict they will win their division this year and make a solid playoff run again this season! :w00t:
  8. I don't agree with a lot of what President Bush and especially the republicans have done since winning office, but when I think about the alternative would have been I thank God every day we don't have to find out what damage a Gore or Kerry presidency would have caused! :w00t::whistle::w00t:
  9. You, my friend are very nieve. What concerns me is an attack that would make the 9/11 attacks look like a prank. According to several reports, there are several Soviet Union era briefcase sized nuclear devices missing since the fall of the Soviet Union. What we all should be worried about is terrorists getting their hands on one of these and detonating it on U.S. soil. Sooner or later they will get their hands on one and it could be a very bad situation. If you think nothing like 9/11 or something much worse could never happen in America again you are living in a fantasy world. The threat is very real. :whistle:
  10. Please don't get v4w started on this thread. He can't stay on topic on any post to save his life! :w00t:
  11. Main stream Christian conservatives always have been and always will be the heart and soul of the Republican Party. They are the biggest block of people who make up the so called silent majority. America has never been as liberal as the media and the hollywood elites try to portray the population. The Republican Party attracts a broad range of people, including people like Camus who just can't stomach left wing radical liberalism. Many minorities are also beginning to move toward fiscal conservatism and the Republican Party and away from rampant govermnent socialism and the decaying Democrat Party. :whistle::w00t::whistle:
  12. The Mount St. Helens eruption spewed more "pollution" into the atmosphere than all the man-made pollution produced in the past 200 years! :whistle:
  13. . . . of course the duped Glogal Warming crowd won't be interested in any real facts since it doesn't fit their "sky is falling" political agenda! :w00t:
  14. Opinion.telegraph By Bob Carter (Filed: 09/04/2006) For many years now, human-caused climate change has been viewed as a large and urgent problem. In truth, however, the biggest part of the problem is neither environmental nor scientific, but a self-created political fiasco. Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero). Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In response to these facts, a global warming devotee will chuckle and say "how silly to judge climate change over such a short period". Yet in the next breath, the same person will assure you that the 28-year-long period of warming which occurred between 1970 and 1998 constitutes a dangerous (and man-made) warming. Tosh. Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate. Does something not strike you as odd here? That industrial carbon dioxide is not the primary cause of earth's recent decadal-scale temperature changes doesn't seem at all odd to many thousands of independent scientists. They have long appreciated - ever since the early 1990s, when the global warming bandwagon first started to roll behind the gravy train of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - that such short-term climate fluctuations are chiefly of natural origin. Yet the public appears to be largely convinced otherwise. How is this possible? Since the early 1990s, the columns of many leading newspapers and magazines, worldwide, have carried an increasing stream of alarmist letters and articles on hypothetical, human-caused climate change. Each such alarmist article is larded with words such as "if", "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", "projected" or "modelled" - and many involve such deep dreaming, or ignorance of scientific facts and principles, that they are akin to nonsense. The problem here is not that of climate change per se, but rather that of the sophisticated scientific brainwashing that has been inflicted on the public, bureaucrats and politicians alike. Governments generally choose not to receive policy advice on climate from independent scientists. Rather, they seek guidance from their own self-interested science bureaucracies and senior advisers, or from the IPCC itself. No matter how accurate it may be, cautious and politically non-correct science advice is not welcomed in Westminster, and nor is it widely reported. Marketed under the imprimatur of the IPCC, the bladder-trembling and now infamous hockey-stick diagram that shows accelerating warming during the 20th century - a statistical construct by scientist Michael Mann and co-workers from mostly tree ring records - has been a seminal image of the climate scaremongering campaign. Thanks to the work of a Canadian statistician, Stephen McIntyre, and others, this graph is now known to be deeply flawed. There are other reasons, too, why the public hears so little in detail from those scientists who approach climate change issues rationally, the so-called climate sceptics. Most are to do with intimidation against speaking out, which operates intensely on several parallel fronts. First, most government scientists are gagged from making public comment on contentious issues, their employing organisations instead making use of public relations experts to craft carefully tailored, frisbee-science press releases. Second, scientists are under intense pressure to conform with the prevailing paradigm of climate alarmism if they wish to receive funding for their research. Third, members of the Establishment have spoken declamatory words on the issue, and the kingdom's subjects are expected to listen. On the alarmist campaign trail, the UK's Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir David King, is thus reported as saying that global warming is so bad that Antarctica is likely to be the world's only habitable continent by the end of this century. Warming devotee and former Chairman of Shell, Lord [Ron] Oxburgh, reportedly agrees with another rash statement of King's, that climate change is a bigger threat than terrorism. And goodly Archbishop Rowan Williams, who self-evidently understands little about the science, has warned of "millions, billions" of deaths as a result of global warming and threatened Mr Blair with the wrath of the climate God unless he acts. By betraying the public's trust in their positions of influence, so do the great and good become the small and silly. Two simple graphs provide needed context, and exemplify the dynamic, fluctuating nature of climate change. The first is a temperature curve for the last six million years, which shows a three-million year period when it was several degrees warmer than today, followed by a three-million year cooling trend which was accompanied by an increase in the magnitude of the pervasive, higher frequency, cold and warm climate cycles. During the last three such warm (interglacial) periods, temperatures at high latitudes were as much as 5 degrees warmer than today's. The second graph shows the average global temperature over the last eight years, which has proved to be a period of stasis. The essence of the issue is this. Climate changes naturally all the time, partly in predictable cycles, and partly in unpredictable shorter rhythms and rapid episodic shifts, some of the causes of which remain unknown. We are fortunate that our modern societies have developed during the last 10,000 years of benignly warm, interglacial climate. But for more than 90 per cent of the last two million years, the climate has been colder, and generally much colder, than today. The reality of the climate record is that a sudden natural cooling is far more to be feared, and will do infinitely more social and economic damage, than the late 20th century phase of gentle warming. The British Government urgently needs to recast the sources from which it draws its climate advice. The shrill alarmism of its public advisers, and the often eco-fundamentalist policy initiatives that bubble up from the depths of the Civil Service, have all long since been detached from science reality. Intern-ationally, the IPCC is a deeply flawed organisation, as acknowledged in a recent House of Lords report, and the Kyoto Protocol has proved a costly flop. Clearly, the wrong horses have been backed. As mooted recently by Tony Blair, perhaps the time has come for Britain to join instead the new Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (AP6), whose six member countries are committed to the development of new technologies to improve environmental outcomes. There, at least, some real solutions are likely to emerge for improving energy efficiency and reducing pollution. Informal discussions have already begun about a new AP6 audit body, designed to vet rigorously the science advice that the Partnership receives, including from the IPCC. Can Britain afford not to be there? • Prof Bob Carter is a geologist at James Cook University, Queensland, engaged in paleoclimate research
  15. That is a great article! Alan Keyes is a man of principal with a depth of understanding of the issues few can match. America needs more leaders with his wisdom and spirit! :thumbsup:
  16. 4th place in the division :whistle:
  17. Matt Williams, For The Daily Sentinel Sunday, April 02, 2006 Back to your posts, big bass hunters. The mother of all freshwater fishing records still looms within reach. California's Mac Weakley has elected not to pursue having the biggest largemouth bass ever caught certified as a new International Game Fish Association world record. The fish in question weighed 25.1 pounds, nearly three pounds heavier than the 74-year old world record caught from Montgomery Lake in Georgia by George Washington Perry. The huge bass was reeled in from 72-acre Dixon Lake in San Diego County on the morning of March 20 after Weakley accidentally foul hooked it with a jig. Weakley released the fish after photographing it and weighing it on a digital scale not certified by the IGFA. For those reasons, and the swarm of controversy surrounding them, the Carlsbad, Calif. angler has trashed the idea of attempting to have the bass certified as a new world record. Probably pretty good thinking. Here's why: The next IGFA world record largemouth will be a potential golden nugget with fins. The angler who catches the mighty fish stands to make a mint in endorsements, possibly millions if he or she plays their cards right. To fully capitalize on the goods, however, the angler needs to be sure the catch is squeaky clean. The fish needs to be caught in the mouth. Not in the head, tail or side.. The weight must be certified. Ideally, the bass should be kept alive and retained, at least long enough for the right people to authenticate the feat. There is no reason to believe Weakley's bass didn't weigh 25 pounds, possibly more. Photos drifting around the Internet depict a truly spectacular fish. It has eyeballs the size of 50 cent pieces and a belly that looks as if there is a bowling ball trapped inside. The angler holding the fish (Weakley's friend, Mike Winn) copped a serious scowl as he strained to raise the heavy fish with one arm. I have never seen a 25-pound bass. But I have been within arms reach of an 18 pounder, several in the 14-16 pound range. Weakley's bass is larger. Much larger. How much bigger? We will never know that for certain. Weakley and the two friends (Jed Dickerson and Winn) with which he was fishing that fateful day released the fish back into Dixon Lake before anyone could retrieve a certified scale. The angler said he chose to release the fish because he didn't want to kill it, and because he didn't think IGFA would certify it as a world record due to the fact it had been foul hooked. He later learned that the automatic IGFA disqualification applies only to fish that are intentionally foul hooked. Weakley and everyone involved with the catch claims the bass was not foul hooked on purpose. The big bass was reportedly huddled around a spawning bed in about 12 feet of water. A smaller male bass was nearby. The anglers took turns casting to the bigger fish. Weakley happened to be the one holding the rod when the bite came. He felt a thump and jerked. Unfortunately, the hook buried in the bass' back, just beneath the dorsal fin. News of such a big fish coming from California didn't come as much of a surprise. Largemouth bass have a long history of growing fat and sassy out there. The Golden State has produced nine of the 10 heaviest bass ever recorded, including several over 20 pounds. Nor did it come as shock to learn the angler was unable to close the deal. Potential world records have been reported from California before. But it always seems like there is some sort of strange hitch in those Western fish stories. Someone will surely get it right someday. Maybe. Until then, the late George Perry can rest easy. My guess is his record is safe for at least another year. Matt Williams, For The Daily Sentinel
  18. I don't know about that trade! They may need Dellucci down the road! :whistle:
  19. Cuff her and stuff her! :w00t: I knew she was going to scream racism! :whistle:
  20. He'll probably be the ace of their staff! :whistle::w00t::whistle: Go Astros! :w00t::thumbsup::w00t:
  21. Southern California, mexicans the minority.:whistle::whome::yay: I have never seen as many mexicans in my life as when i went so SoCal.:yay: Try to follow me this time . . . the vast majority of Mexicans here legally aren't protesting, it's a relatively small number of radicals who are upset that we are going to enforce the law! :w00t:
  22. It's the vocal minority that is getting all the press. I agree with Colmes, we should arrest them, find out if they are illegals and deport them if they aren't here legally. I believe the vast majority of the Hispanic population that entered this country legally would agree! :whistle:
  23. Here's another one for you "there is no liberal media bias" looney liberals and confused self-proclaimed moderates - KF XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU MARCH 23, 2006 13:11:09 ET XXXXX ABC NEWS EXEC: 'BUSH MAKES ME SICK'; E-MAIL REVEALED **Exclusive** A top producer at ABC NEWS declared "Bush makes me sick" in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT. John Green, currently executive producer of the weekend edition of GOOD MORNING AMERICA, unloaded on the president in an ABC company email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT. "If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke," Green complained. The blunt comments by Green, along with other emails obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT, further reveal the inner workings of the nation's news outlets. A friend of Green's at ABC says Green is mortified by the email. "John feels so badly about this email. He is a straight shooter and great producer who is always fair. That said, he deeply regrets the sentiment expressed in the email and the embarresment it causes ABC News." Developing...
×
×
  • Create New...