> >> > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> >>I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
> >> >>interfere with the status quo.
> >> > Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
> >> If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be > >> Texas.
> >They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
> >over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
> >hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
> >> >while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
> >> Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
> >Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
> >affect zombies?
> Probably not a bit since zombies seem to defy every bit of physics and
> biology that we think should apply to any formerly living body. They
> seem to have their own bit of reality that cloaks their body.
But would it at least be enough to stop them from, say, simply appearing
out of nowhere on a previously empty stretch of highway? :)
-- Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Get down off the cross. We need the wood." -- Pete Lattimer, WAREHOUSE 13
> >> > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> >>I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
> >> >>interfere with the status quo.
> >> > Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
> >> If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be > >> Texas.
> >They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
> >over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
> >hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
> >> >while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
> >> Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
> >Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
> >affect zombies?
> They wouldn't have zombies in this show. It would make it too realistic.
Good point, and surely one that will be addressed when the ZOMBIE
REVOLUTION spin-off series gets launched.
-- Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Get down off the cross. We need the wood." -- Pete Lattimer, WAREHOUSE 13
> > > > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > >>I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
> > > >>interfere with the status quo.
> > > > Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
> > > If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be > > > Texas.
> > They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
> > over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
> > hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
> > > >while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
> > > Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
> > Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
> > affect zombies?
> Zombies use natural electricity so they'd be okay.
And they're already brain-dead, so it's not as if there's a lot of
synapses firing to begin with. Which raises another interesting
question. How would this whole loss of energy thing affect CD?
-- Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Get down off the cross. We need the wood." -- Pete Lattimer, WAREHOUSE 13
> > Zombies use natural electricity so they'd be okay. The Frankenstein
> > creature arguably uses artificial electricity ... yes, it comes from
> > lightning, but it's stored in what are effectively man made batteries
> > (see the electrodes in his neck) and we already know those don't work.
> What if Frankenstein had an amulet around his neck?
That wouldn't help his monster. :)
-- Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Get down off the cross. We need the wood." -- Pete Lattimer, WAREHOUSE 13
> > Wow. Someone actually cares enough about this mess to create a
> > domain and spend time on mapping things out?
> It says "Copyright 2012 Revolution TV - Fansite for NBC TV Show
> Revolution" but it looks like professionally produced property of
> the studio or the network, rather than anybody's labor of love.
> (I.e., "fansite" meaning "for the fans" rather than "by fans.")
> Also, the map is apparently one that's used on-set; if so then it
> wasn't specially produced as secondary material.
Ah. I didn't click the link. So it was/is some viral marketing, or some
such thing...
-- Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Get down off the cross. We need the wood." -- Pete Lattimer, WAREHOUSE 13
>> > Zombies use natural electricity so they'd be okay. The Frankenstein
>> > creature arguably uses artificial electricity ... yes, it comes from
>> > lightning, but it's stored in what are effectively man made batteries
>> > (see the electrodes in his neck) and we already know those don't work.
>> What if Frankenstein had an amulet around his neck?
<reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
> On 08/10/2012 2:58 AM, Your Name wrote:
> > As I said, it's not noticeable.
> Yes, it is noticeable - to scientists. Did I need to spell that out??? > Srsly?? Read what I wrote. I specifically said it wouldn't be noticed by > someone trying to lose weight.
> Nobody is going to notice that they
> > suddenly weigh 1 lbs (or whatever it really is) less if the Earth stopped
> > spinning ... even ignoring the fact that they'd probably have more
> > important things to worry about if that heppend.
> We're not talking here about when the Earth stops spinning. We're > talking about right now.
Here we go again with the pedantic idiocy. Whatever you whnt to delude
yourself with. :-\
> In article <GYmdnU6tFJTCVO_NnZ2dnUVZ_tedn...@supernews.com>, cloud dreamer
> <reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
>> On 08/10/2012 2:58 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>> As I said, it's not noticeable.
>> Yes, it is noticeable - to scientists. Did I need to spell that out???
>> Srsly?? Read what I wrote. I specifically said it wouldn't be noticed by
>> someone trying to lose weight.
>> Nobody is going to notice that they
>>> suddenly weigh 1 lbs (or whatever it really is) less if the Earth stopped
>>> spinning ... even ignoring the fact that they'd probably have more
>>> important things to worry about if that heppend.
>> We're not talking here about when the Earth stops spinning. We're
>> talking about right now.
> Here we go again with the pedantic idiocy. Whatever you whnt to delude
> yourself with. :-\
<anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article > <YourName-0810121826350...@203-118-187-48.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
> YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
> > In article <anim8rfsk-6298A0.18372907102...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
> > <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > The important thing here, and it's something I hope we can all agree on, > > > is that Clodreamer was wrong.
> > Nope, even ignoring the typo I don't agree with that. :-p
> > I think you'll find it was "Edward McArdle" (although they could be the
> > same person) who posted that someone would weeight less at the equator if
> > the Earth stopped spinning ... do try to keep up. ;-)
> > Of course, he could have been joking, but it's impossible to tell when
> > some people don't use smiley faces to indicate such things.
> Okay, which set of quotes above is Clodreamer?
> I followed it as being
> > > > > > > >> If centrifugal force was a remotely noticeable component of
> > > > > > > >> gravity, then you would weigh more at the equator than you do > > > > > > > >> at the poles ... and you don't.
> which is wrong.
That was actually my post in direct reply to Edward's ... which I later
said was incorrect.
> anim8rFSK sent the following on Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:57:18 -0700:
> > In article <v1kr68h3k0obu3ob4sg4e1emikaor89...@4ax.com>,
> > Jim G. <jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > Obveeus sent the following on Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:19:53 -0400:
> > > > > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > > >>I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
> > > > >>interfere with the status quo.
> > > > > Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
> > > > If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be > > > > Texas.
> > > They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
> > > over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
> > > hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
> > > > >while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
> > > > Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
> > > Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
> > > affect zombies?
> > Zombies use natural electricity so they'd be okay.
> And they're already brain-dead, so it's not as if there's a lot of
> synapses firing to begin with. Which raises another interesting
> question. How would this whole loss of energy thing affect CD?
heee heee
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
> shawn sent the following on Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:56:20 -0400:
> > On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:22:41 -0500, Jim G.
> > <jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >Obveeus sent the following on Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:19:53 -0400:
> > >> > On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >> >>I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
> > >> >>interfere with the status quo.
> > >> > Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
> > >> If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be > > >> Texas.
> > >They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
> > >over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
> > >hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
> > >> >while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
> > >> Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
> > >Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
> > >affect zombies?
> > Probably not a bit since zombies seem to defy every bit of physics and
> > biology that we think should apply to any formerly living body. They
> > seem to have their own bit of reality that cloaks their body.
> But would it at least be enough to stop them from, say, simply appearing
> out of nowhere on a previously empty stretch of highway? :)
The "CSI Horatio" effect.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
> anim8rFSK sent the following on Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:58:49 -0700:
> > In article <1vjr68lvedt06ba3as31bsm82562mrf...@4ax.com>,
> > Jim G. <jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > anim8rFSK sent the following on Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:25:29 -0700:
> > > > In article <k4i2pf$24...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > "cloud dreamer" <reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On 03/10/2012 4:02 PM, Tony Calguire wrote:
> > > > > >> But the Mormons are really prepared for this sort of thing in real > > > > > >> life.
> > > > > >> It's part of the religion and culture. They would be one of the > > > > > >> stronger
> > > > > >> and more cohesive societies in some kind of disaster like this.
> > > > > > And when they get hungry, they just eat their neighbours.
> > > > > Mormons are supposed to have 6 months of food stored in their house.
> > > > > Still, > > > > > that wouldn't be very useful in this situation as all it would do > > > > > would > > > > > be > > > > > delay the inevitable mass dieoff by 6 months.
> > > > Huh. It used to be a year. Is downgrading from 12 to 6 months > > > > optimistic or pessimistic?
> > > I think it has something to do with the Canadian exchange rate.
> > What are we exchanging the Canadians *for*?
> Some chippy Norwegians and a herd or two of reindeer. The holidays are
> coming up, and all that.
Don't Canadians get Xmas wrong the way they do Thanksgiving and Independence Day?
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
>> >> > Ah, that explains why so much survival food/supplies come from Utah >> >> > (along
>> >> > with the warning of the difference in air pressure and the effect it >> >> > can
>> >> > have on some products).
>> >> I once had a bag of potato chips explode in the back of the car while
>> >> driving up into the mountains to go camping.
>> > So you're saying we should load JLC in a car with Anim and send them
>> > both on a camping trip in the mountains? In a car with windows that
>> > can't be lowered?
>> I predict that Jamie Lee Curtis would swell until she popped...nine months >> later.
>Good point. He doth protest a lot, dothn't he?
He just said he despises her and she disgusts him beyond belief. He
didn't say he wouldn't have sex with her.
<jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>William December Starr sent the following on 4 Oct 2012 16:24:01 -0400:
>> In article <vtjr68dg42j74pf6vn9vrpk1if85hca...@4ax.com>,
>> Jim G. <jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid> said:
>> > Wow. Someone actually cares enough about this mess to create a
>> > domain and spend time on mapping things out?
>> It says "Copyright 2012 Revolution TV - Fansite for NBC TV Show
>> Revolution" but it looks like professionally produced property of
>> the studio or the network, rather than anybody's labor of love.
>> (I.e., "fansite" meaning "for the fans" rather than "by fans.")
>> Also, the map is apparently one that's used on-set; if so then it
>> wasn't specially produced as secondary material.
>Ah. I didn't click the link. So it was/is some viral marketing, or some
>such thing...
I don't know what it was intended for but it's just a closeup of the
map that we saw on the show. Close enough to see how the various
territories of the US and Canada (only a portion of Canada) has been
divided up.
> >> >> > Ah, that explains why so much survival food/supplies come from Utah > >> >> > (along
> >> >> > with the warning of the difference in air pressure and the effect it > >> >> > can
> >> >> > have on some products).
> >> >> I once had a bag of potato chips explode in the back of the car while
> >> >> driving up into the mountains to go camping.
> >> > So you're saying we should load JLC in a car with Anim and send them
> >> > both on a camping trip in the mountains? In a car with windows that
> >> > can't be lowered?
> >> I predict that Jamie Lee Curtis would swell until she popped...nine months > >> later.
> >Good point. He doth protest a lot, dothn't he?
> He just said he despises her and she disgusts him beyond belief. He
> didn't say he wouldn't have sex with her.
"I wouldn't have sex with her." Unless maybe I could have her from wwwwaaayyy back. I definitely found her repugnant and undoable as far back as True Lies. As far back as Halloween ... well, I wouldn't even look at her with PJ Soles in the neighborhood. Terror Train? Nah, you've got Vanity, BEFORE Prince got his hands on her (or pretended to).
Hmm. Anything But Love? Nah, not with Holly around.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
> In article <GYmdnU6tFJTCVO_NnZ2dnUVZ_tedn...@supernews.com>, cloud dreamer
> <reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
> > On 08/10/2012 2:58 AM, Your Name wrote:
> > > As I said, it's not noticeable.
> > Yes, it is noticeable - to scientists. Did I need to spell that out??? > > Srsly?? Read what I wrote. I specifically said it wouldn't be noticed by > > someone trying to lose weight.
> > Nobody is going to notice that they
> > > suddenly weigh 1 lbs (or whatever it really is) less if the Earth stopped
> > > spinning ... even ignoring the fact that they'd probably have more
> > > important things to worry about if that heppend.
> > We're not talking here about when the Earth stops spinning. We're > > talking about right now.
> Here we go again with the pedantic idiocy. Whatever you whnt to delude
> yourself with. :-\
So what you're saying is, Clodreamer is wrong?
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
>> He just said he despises her and she disgusts him beyond belief. He
>> didn't say he wouldn't have sex with her.
> "I wouldn't have sex with her." Unless maybe I could have her from
> wwwwaaayyy back.
Um, I know we had a discussion yesterday about how you should be careful about which end is up if you really believe what you say about her, but do you really think the answer is to approach her from wwwwaaayyy back?
> I definitely found her repugnant and undoable as far
> back as True Lies. As far back as Halloween ... well, I wouldn't even
> look at her with PJ Soles in the neighborhood. Terror Train? Nah,
> you've got Vanity, BEFORE Prince got his hands on her (or pretended to).
> Hmm. Anything But Love? Nah, not with Holly around.
I'm not sure how you could dislike her looks in HALLOWEEN or TRADING PLACES.
<anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article > <YourName-0910120907230...@203-118-187-23.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
> YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
> > In article <GYmdnU6tFJTCVO_NnZ2dnUVZ_tedn...@supernews.com>, cloud dreamer
> > <reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
> > > On 08/10/2012 2:58 AM, Your Name wrote:
> > > > As I said, it's not noticeable.
> > > Yes, it is noticeable - to scientists. Did I need to spell that out??? > > > Srsly?? Read what I wrote. I specifically said it wouldn't be noticed by > > > someone trying to lose weight.
> > > > Nobody is going to notice that they
> > > > suddenly weigh 1 lbs (or whatever it really is) less if the Earth > > > > stopped spinning ... even ignoring the fact that they'd probably > > > > have more important things to worry about if that heppend.
> > > We're not talking here about when the Earth stops spinning. We're > > > talking about right now.
> > Here we go again with the pedantic idiocy. Whatever you whnt to delude
> > yourself with. :-\
> So what you're saying is, Clodreamer is wrong?
What I'm saying is that I can't be bothered with pedantic idiocy. I really
don't have the Internet time nor the inclination to try and explain every
miniscule little detail to those with reading comprehension issues.
> In article <anim8rfsk-DE74CE.16212708102...@news.easynews.com>, anim8rFSK
> <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
>> In article
>> <YourName-0910120907230...@203-118-187-23.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>,
>> YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name) wrote:
>>> In article <GYmdnU6tFJTCVO_NnZ2dnUVZ_tedn...@supernews.com>, cloud dreamer
>>> <reduce.re...@recycle.com> wrote:
>>>> On 08/10/2012 2:58 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>>>> As I said, it's not noticeable.
>>>> Yes, it is noticeable - to scientists. Did I need to spell that out???
>>>> Srsly?? Read what I wrote. I specifically said it wouldn't be noticed by
>>>> someone trying to lose weight.
>>>>> Nobody is going to notice that they
>>>>> suddenly weigh 1 lbs (or whatever it really is) less if the Earth
>>>>> stopped spinning ... even ignoring the fact that they'd probably
>>>>> have more important things to worry about if that heppend.
>>>> We're not talking here about when the Earth stops spinning. We're
>>>> talking about right now.
>>> Here we go again with the pedantic idiocy. Whatever you whnt to delude
>>> yourself with. :-\
>> So what you're saying is, Clodreamer is wrong?
> What I'm saying is that I can't be bothered with pedantic idiocy. I really
> don't have the Internet time nor the inclination to try and explain every
> miniscule little detail to those with reading comprehension issues.
Holy crap. It's not me with the reading comprehension problem. I simply posted a link that clarified YOUR statement that you didn't think there would be a weight difference and if there was, you'd weigh more at the equator.
That's all. My link said you would weigh different and more at the pole. No big fucking deal. You let the trolls turn a minor point into something it wasn't. Even now, Animalfucker is goading you into continuing this crap.
> Mason Barge sent the following on Thu, 04 Oct 2012 18:33:46 -0400:
>> On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:22:41 -0500, Jim G. <jimgy...@geemail.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> Obveeus sent the following on Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:19:53 -0400:
>>>>> On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:32:44 -0700, BTR1701 <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I like how Texas is still just Texas. We apparently didn't let anyone
>>>>>> interfere with the status quo.
>>>>> Texas has taken over a few of the neighboring states
>>>> If any of those territories represents a Mexican takeover, it would be
>>>> Texas.
>>> They'd be crazy to take on the Texans. OTOH, California would just roll
>>> over for them, and it's not as if the rest of the company would be in a
>>> hurry to die for a bunch of Hollywood liberals...
>>>>> while Georgia heads up the federation of southeastern states.
>>>> Sure, but that is also the zombie territory.
>>> Which raises a good question. How would this whole loss of energy thing
>>> affect zombies?
>> They wouldn't have zombies in this show. It would make it too realistic.
> Good point, and surely one that will be addressed when the ZOMBIE
> REVOLUTION spin-off series gets launched.
The dance spin-off?
-- The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted, hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate wouldn't tolerate.
> That's all. My link said you would weigh different and more at the pole. > No big fucking deal. You let the trolls turn a minor point into > something it wasn't. Even now, Animalfucker is goading you into > continuing this crap.
> >> He just said he despises her and she disgusts him beyond belief. He
> >> didn't say he wouldn't have sex with her.
> > "I wouldn't have sex with her." Unless maybe I could have her from
> > wwwwaaayyy back.
> Um, I know we had a discussion yesterday about how you should be careful > about which end is up if you really believe what you say about her, but do > you really think the answer is to approach her from wwwwaaayyy back?
> > I definitely found her repugnant and undoable as far
> > back as True Lies. As far back as Halloween ... well, I wouldn't even
> > look at her with PJ Soles in the neighborhood. Terror Train? Nah,
> > you've got Vanity, BEFORE Prince got his hands on her (or pretended to).
> > Hmm. Anything But Love? Nah, not with Holly around.
> I'm not sure how you could dislike her looks in HALLOWEEN or TRADING PLACES.
I'm saying that, re HALLOWEEN, I wouldn't even notice her with PJ Soles around. I ... don't think I've ever seen (most of) TRADING SPACES.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
"anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <k4vnle$cb...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>> I'm not sure how you could dislike her looks in HALLOWEEN or TRADING >> PLACES.
> I'm saying that, re HALLOWEEN, I wouldn't even notice her with PJ Soles
> around. I ... don't think I've ever seen (most of) TRADING SPACES.
How have you not seen TRADING PLACES? You need to put that one in your queue.
>> In article <k4vnle$cb...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how you could dislike her looks in HALLOWEEN or TRADING >>> PLACES.
>> I'm saying that, re HALLOWEEN, I wouldn't even notice her with PJ Soles
>> around. I ... don't think I've ever seen (most of) TRADING SPACES.
>How have you not seen TRADING PLACES? You need to put that one in your >queue.
Right next to "Caddyshack" for the most quotes for arrested
development American males ever. And JLC shows off one of the greatest
female bodies of all time. And smiles a lot too. I don't get all the
hate for her around here.
On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:39:54 -0700, anim8rFSK wrote:
> Don't Canadians get Xmas wrong the way they do Thanksgiving and
> Independence Day?
We don't get any of those "wrong". As a separate country, our own independence was on a different day from the U.S.'s, and as for Thanksgiving, *you* get that one wrong.
