. . . a tear to my eye
Listen to elizabeth's crystal clear voice. Notice her total composure when the microphone failed. Hear the audience back her up and finish the Anthem.
With all the vitriol being spouted by the talking heads on television and the politicians everywhere, moments like this are wonderful, simply wonderful.
. . . goes a long way
The liberal left is all up in arms about this map, because Sarah Palin undoubtably was the proximate cause of Rep. Giffords' assination attempt.
Now, would you care to guess which party paraded this map? Not a hard guess, is it?
Lefty columnists and mainstream media are unabashedly using this tragedy for political gain.
It's reprehensible.
. . .I'm too picky
But, I expect quality novelists to have some ability to check facts - or have them checked.
I'm currently reading "The Death Trust" by David Rollins. It has a good start, but there are an unexpected number of errors.
In discussing the habit of middle easterners to fire their weapons into the air for practically any reason, he says:
"The slugs always came back to earth, and when they did, they were every bit as lethal as aimed rounds fired from the shoulder."
Bzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong! Old wives' tale.
Take a 5.56 x 45 NATO round for example. It leaves the muzzle at 3,100 feet/sec. When falling back to earth, it's maximum velocity is about 175 feet/sec. That makes the energy at the muzzle about 1,325 ft-lbs, and the energy of the falling bullet is about 5.0 ft-lbs. So, it's about 0.4% as deadly - but that won't make a good story. Something weighing a little over a tenth of an ounce at that speed wouldn't be comfortable, but a good felt hat would be sufficient protection.
Then, there's the general whose glider shed its wings and took him nose-first into the ground.
"General Scott hit the base of a towering pine tree at two hindred and ninety-one miles per hour."
Bzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong!
While free-fall speeds over 200 mph are possible near sea level, it takes an experienced skydiver, not someone in a broken glider wetting his nappies because he only has seconds to live.
Of course, General Scott was important because of the job he held.
"He was the CO of Ramstein Air Base. A four-star heavy hitter"Bzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong!
With very rare exceptions, Commanding officers of American military bases are Army, Air Force or Marine colonels or Navy captains.
And I'm only up to page 15.
. . . . with a purpose.
The purpose, obviously, is to illustrate the fact that ignorance knows no bounds.
And, I do give proper credit, so the plagarism thingy should be de minimus, and I claim fair use. If you follow this link, you have the choice of being frightened out of your wits, or laughing until you need a change of undies.
This particular braniac is at post #19. God help us if he has congregation larger than 2.
This is the proper explanation for the tides, unlike the preposterous theory that the moon is somehow involved. Here are three glaring mistakes in the secular scientist's thinking which makes their precious theory fall apart.
1) How can the moon pull water away from the Earth when the Earth has a stronger gravitational pull? One thing that these secularist idiots kept saying in the 3 experiments thread is that the the Earth is a sphere and gravity pulls everything towards the center. Okay, for argument's sake, let's assume that crazy idea is true. So if the Earth, which is much more massive and stronger than the moon, is pulling water towards its center, how can the moon overcome it? We know the Earth is stronger because the moon revolves around us (according to their theory). If the moon was strong enough to create tides, it would mean that the Earth would have to be revolving around the moon. No secular scientist would admit that.
2) How can the moon overcome the sun's gravity, when the sun is even stronger than the Earth? This just gets even more absurd. The Earth is stronger than the moon, but the Sun is stronger than the Earth. How the heck could the tides be created by the moon and not the sun? The scientists will say "Well because it's only 280,000 miles away." (It's actually only about 500). But okay, even at that, it would be the same idea presented in the first question: We would be revolving around the moon if that were the case.
3) If the moon is strong enough to pull water from a far-away planet, how come there is an absence of gravity on the moon? It cannot contain an atmosphere, and if the Apollo hoax is to be believed, you can jump around like bunny rabbits on pogo sticks. The moon is so weak in gravity it can't even hold a 200 lb man to the surface, let alone weightless air particles. Yet, yet, this same object is somehow able to pull billions and billions of cubic tons of water, hundreds of thousand of miles away, and beat the gravitational field of the Earth!
The problem with the above three mistakes is they try to have it both ways in gravity. If object A is more powerful than B, A will exert influence on B, but not the other way around. A smaller object cannot affect a larger object. They say if you jump out of an airplane, it's the Earth's gravity pulling a smaller object (you) to the ground. Well, why don't we affect the Earth's gravity? Why don't we push the Earth back?
The only logical conclusion is that:
- The Earth is flat, like the Bible says.
- The Sun and Moon are both nearby and small objects, about 500 miles away, which revolve around the Earth
- Tides are caused by the Bathtub Theory.
So sayeth the Rev. Jim Osborne.
So, what did my cheeky daughter and her evil English husband send me? Don't strain your cervello. I should have seen it coming.
Diabolical thinkers that they are, they bought it three months in advance because they were afraid it wouldn't be available after the election.
Diabolical, indeed.
New Year's Eve . . .
. . . in Napoli
I did not expect this, so my camerawork sucks. I had to run to the basement, dig up my camera and put in a charged battery, but I believe I caught it at its peak. It's now 12:45, and it's still going on.
The Italians will launch fireworks on just about any special occasion, but I've never seen anything like this.
. . . redux
Most of my family tree has its roots in England, Ireland or Scotland - notwithstanding the Lowdermilk (Lautermilch) branch of my grandmother.
I suppose there is a horsethief or madam or grifter somewhere in the line, but I have found none. However, one of the more interesting finds is Sir Leonard Halliday, Lord mayor of London from October 29, 1605 to October 1606.
Leonard was knighted on July 26, 1603 by King James I, and later became one of the 124 merchants who formed the East India Company.
For those of you with a little knowledge of English history, you will remember, remember the 5th of November 1603. Just seven days after Leonard's investiture as Lord Mayor, Guy Fawkes was found guarding 36 barrels of gunpowder under the house of lords. Sir Leonard went on to great success as a merchant. Guy Fawkes and his cohorts did not fare as well.
Leonard's coat of arms is blazoned: Sable, three helmets Argent garnished Or, within a bordure engrailed of the second.
Translation: On a black shield, three silver helmets trimmed in gold,within scalloped silver border.
